
^ 




b L> — ^ 






BEQUEST OF 
PAUL J. PELZ 



THREE DISCOURSES 



RELIGION OF REASOI. 



GERRIT SMITH. 



UNCHANGED FROM THEIR ORIGINAL PUBLICATION. 



NEW^YOEK: 

FOR SALE BY ROSS & TOUSEY, 121 NASSAU STREET. 
1859. 



\qJ^ 



#5.1 






"NJL 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

A DISCOURSE BY GERRIT SMITH. 

rN- FKXERBORO, StKB. SIST, 1858. 



Word has gone out tliat I am this day to present a new 
religion: and hence no doubt this upiusually large assembly. 
It is indeed a new religion that I am to present ; and yet it is an 
old one. It is old, and yet it is new. It is the same religion 
which was preached and lived by Jesus Christ more than 
eighteen centuries ago. It is the same " faith which was once 
delivered unto the saints." Thus old is this religion : and yet 
so little is it preached and apprehended, that it well deserves to 
be called a new one. 

I see, my neighbors, that you are disappointed. You came 
to this place with your curiosity highly excited to hear about a 
new religion : and it turns out that I am to tell you of but the 
old one. I have put a damper upon your raised expectations 
by announcing for my theme the old religion of Jesus Christ. 
Nevertheless, is it not a new rehgion to many of you ? The 
commandment that " ye love one another," was in point of fact 
an old one : and yet Jesus said : " A new commandment I give 
unto you, that ye love one another." To those whom He 
addressed it was new. 

Do I stir the indignation of some of you by intimating that 
you are not accustomed to hear the religion of Jesus preached ? 
But when and where do you hear it preached ? " Every San- 
day," say you. "In all the churches," say you. Well, if this 
is so, I confess that I am not so fortunate as you are. For very 
rarely do I hear it. You tell me that the clergymen of this 
neighborhood preach it. These are good men. I love and 



4 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

honor them : and I doubt not that they are all in the way to 
heaven. But if I understand them, it is not the religion of 
Jesus which they preach. They preach in favor of creeds and 
churches and a clerical order of men. So mistaken are they, as 
still to believe that Jesus came to establish all these : — whereas 
He came to send them all down stream. Blind are they still to 
the fact, that when His religion shall have come to prevail over 
the whole earth, there will not one church creed be left ; no, nor 
one clergyman ; no, nor one church in the present and popular 
sense of the word. 

A religious creed is proper. Every man should have one. 
But a church creed is improper. Fifty or a hundred people in 
Peterboro or Cazenovia, however much alike in their views 
and spirit, should no more be required to adopt a common 
religious creed than to shorten or stretch out their bodies to a 
common length. 

There is a sad misconception in regard to a church also. The 
common idea is, that to make a church people must come toge- 
ther and organize, much as in the case of a Mutual Insurance 
Company. This is the way a Sectarian church is made. But 
Jesus no more thought of providing for a sectarian church than 
for a political party. In His eye the Christians of a place are 
the church of the place : and this too whether they know it or 
not, will it or not. They are such by force of their character : 
and votes can neither make nor unmake the fact. 

As to the clerical order. Many clergymen are among the 
best of men. Nevertheless such an order is wholly unauthoriz- 
ed and exceedingly pernicious. Their assumption of an ex- 
clusive right to teach religion makes the teachers conceited, 
dogmatic, arrogant, tyrannical ; and their hearers lazy in mind 
and slavish in spirit. 

The plea for a clerical order is that men learned in religion 
are needed to teach it. This however is a pagan idea, that has 
come down to us. To be able to teach a pagan religion — to 
explain its mysteries and superstitions and absurdities — does 
indeed require much study of books and much cabalistic learning. 
Somewhat so is it in the case of the Hebrew religion also. But 
the religion taught by Jesus is not a letter but a life. So simple 
is it that the unlearned can both understand and teach it. 
Even fishermen He pronounced fit to preach His religion. Ay, 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 5 

little children can compreliend it. "Out of the mouths of 
babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise," says Jesus. " I 
thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth," says He, 
"that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, 
and hast revealed them unto babes." Wise and good men are 
the teachers in many theological seminaries. Emphatically true 
is this in the case of the one in our own county. Nevertheless 
a theological seminary is a mistake. This it is because the cur- 
rent religion is a mistake. The true religion is too simple to 
make the training of a theological seminary necessary for those 
who teach it. We should allow the wisdom and goodness of 
God to assure us that the religion which lie has given to the 
world must correspond in its simplicity with the simplicity of 
the masses. 

Let it not be supposed from what I have said, that I object to 
the pastorship. Every church should have at least one pastor. 
He may or may not however have many of the gifts of a 
preacher. 

Every true church of Christ is a simple democracy. Such 
practically were the primitive churches. Its ordinary assem- 
blies should be mere conferences in which all persons, male or 
female, are to feel entirely free to speak as the spirit moves them. 
In this wise are they capable, without having any other preachers 
than those of their own body, to edify the church, and to glorify 
God. No Christian should doubt his right to open his lips on 
such occasions. Faith in Christ is the warrant to speak for 
Christ. " I believed," says Paul, " and therefore have I spoken." 
But in addition to this means of grace and growth within them- 
selves, the collective churches should have and should liberally 
support a powerful itinerant ministry : and this I can say 
without being inconsistent with what I have said of the sim- 
plicity of Christ's religion. The Pauls and Barnabases of 
modern times should travel among the churches, as did the Pauls 
and Barnabases of ancient times. The obscurest country church 
should be favored, as often as every month or two, with a dis- 
course from a Finney, a Beecher, a Lucretia Mott, an Angelina 
Weld, a Chapin, a Parker, a Beriah Green, an Alonzo Potter, 
or an Abram Pryne. 

But I proceed to add to my reasons for declaring that the 
clergymen of this neighborhood do not preach the religion of 



6 THE EELIGION OF REASON. 

Jesus. They do not preach it — for they preach that salvation 
turns on believing in the " doctrines." I am not blaming them 
for teaching the divinity of Christ, the atonement, an eternal 
hell, and the plenary inspiration of the Bible. What I blame 
them for, is their teaching that they who do not understand and 
receive these doctrines must perish. I might admit that Jesus 
taught all these doctrines. But where did He teach that if a 
man does not understand and receive them, he shall perish? 
He taught that at the close of this earthly drama men are to be 
judged by their lives. The great decisive question then will 
be — not what were your doctrines, but what were your deeds ? 
How did you acquit yourself in regard to those simple duties, 
opportunities for doing which crowd the whole pathway of 
both high and humble life, even from childhood to the grave ? 
Did you feed the hungry, and clothe the naked, and welcome 
the stranger, and visit the sick and the prisoner ? In perfect 
and beautiful consistency with these interrogatories is the 
Saviour's declaration : " By their fruits ye shall know them;" 
and also the Apostles' : " Pure religion and undefiled before 
God and the Father is to visit the widow and the fatherless in 
their affliction." 

False tests of character do our clerical neighbors apply in their 
trying of us by " the doctrines." In reference to good King 
Josiah, Jeremiah says : "He judged the cause of the poor and 
needy ; then it was well with him : was not this to know me ? 
saith the Lord." Says Micah: " What doth the Lord require 
of thee but to do justly, and love mercy, and to walk humbly 
with thy God ?" And how emphatically does Jesus make the 
life the test when He says : " Therefore all things whatsoever 
ye would that men should do to you do ye even so to them." 
It is honesty, that He enjoins in these words. To be honest is 
to be a Christian. The most honest man on earth is the best 
Christian on earth. It is indeed the most comprehensive honesty, 
that is here required. The spirit, which dwelt in Jesus, can 
alone inspire it : and strangers are we to that spirit until we are 
born again. Radical must be the change in our fallen and 
depraved nature, ere a thorough and gospel honesty can 
characterize us. I say fallen nature. Let me remark that I do 
not entertain the common views of this subject. Owing to 
ancestral violations of moral as well as physical and intellectual 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 7 

laws, we inherit a constitution morally as well as physically 
and intellectually impaired. This is all I mean by a fallen 
nature, adding thereto what we may ourselves have done to 
degrade it. 

The clergymen of our neighborhood believe and inculcate 
that little can be done for a man until he has become thoroughly 
instructed in and entirely converted to that whole form of 
doctrine which they regard as vital. This step taken, and his 
next is to conform his life to the teaching. Now I admit that 
the creed exerts an influence upon the life : — ^but it is not so 
great as that which the life exerts upon the creed. The creed 
should be- left to grow out of the life rather than the life out of 
the creed. Let a man set out to deal more justly and lovingly 
with all his fellow men, and he will soon find himself forming a 
creed, which corresponds with his improved course of life. As 
his life becomes increasingly pure and beautiful, so will his creed 
become increasingly sound and comprehensive. In saying that 
the life influences the creed more than the creed the life, I am 
justified by the Saviour's declaration : "If any man will do his 
will he shall know of the doctrine." It is mainly in doing right 
that we get a right creed. 

But it is said that Jesus requires faith, and makes it the con- 
dition of salvation. Faith in what ? In the doctrines on which 
our clergymen harp habitually ? — I ask again — where does He 
teach that the want of such faith is fatal ? '' However this may 
be," reply our clergymen, " He nevertheless makes faith in 
Himself essential." I admit it. He says: " If ye believe not 
that I am He, ye shall die in your sins." But just here comes 
up the great question — what is it to believe in Christ ? Is it to 
believe in " the doctrines ?" If so, then the millions of good men, 
who had never heard of them, nor even of Christ, and the 
millions too of good men who, having heard of them, had 
nevertheless mistaken conceptions of them, have perished. But 
as sure as God is just and merciful, all good men, live and die 
they in whatever ignorance of the person of Christ or of " the 
doctrines," are saved. What then is it to believe in Christ? I 
answer that such belief in its very highest sense is faith in 
justice, sincerity, mercy, love, and the other moral qualities of 
which man, be he in Christendom or heathendom, has instinctive 
knowledge, and for his growth in which, be he in Christendom or 



8 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

heathendom, he is responsible. These are the qualities, which 
make up that sum of truth which Jesus came into our world to 
live to honor and die to magnify : and of which He declares 
Himself to be the impersonation when He says : " I am the way, 
the truth and the life." This is the truth of which He spake 
when He said to Pilate : ''To this end was I born and for this 
cause came I into th'e world, that I should bear witness unto the 
truth." I repeat that to believe in Jesus in the very highest 
sense is to believe in those virtues which were all clustered in 
His perfect character : and moreover it is to believe in them so 
cordially and so constantly as to make them our own, and to 
prove that they are our own by their blossoms and fruits in our 
lives. Our lives and our likeness to Christ are the precise 
measure of our faith in Christ. 

I am well aware how contrary to the common view of it is 
this view of faith in Christ. As is generally held, right appre- 
hensions — adoring, melting thoughts — of His person and personal 
character constitute pre-eminently true faith in Christ. I would 
not undervalue such apprehensions and thoughts. He who has 
them not, even though the life and death of Christ are clearly 
before him, can give no satisfactory proof that he appreciates the 
truths which Christ came to teach and illustrate, and no satis- 
factory proof that he welcomes the duties which He came to 
enjoin. ISTevertheless the Saviour does Himself admit that men 
may mistake Him and yet be safe. "Whosoever," says He, 
" speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven 
him : but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall 
not be forgiven him." That is, he shall not be safe who mistakes 
in regard to the spirit and essence — the soul and substance of 
religion. If men may err in regard to Christ and yet be 
forgiven, it nevertheless does not follow that they shall be for- 
given, who live in the denial of those vital truths, which the 
Spirit of God teaches in every heart. 

I said that our clergymen make the doctrine of the plenary 
inspiration of the Bible essential to salvation ; and that in so 
doing they preach not the religion of Christ. But are they not 
also in error in respect to the fact of such inspiration ? 

The Bible is really the best book in the world : though the 
present uses of it make it practically the worst. All other books 
put together are, not so much as the Bible is, the occasion of 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 9 

obstructing the progress of civilization and of filling the world 
with ignorance and superstition. It is adapted as no other book 
is to enrich the mind and expand the soul. But misapprehen- 
ed, misinterpreted, and perverted to the extent it is, no other 
book — nay no number of books — does so much to darken the 
mind and shrivel the soul. 

The clergy make the Bible supreme authority. But our 
reason is under God the final judge in all questions. The Bible, 
instead of being used but to enlighten reason, is made to over- 
ride it. Nevertheless this book, like every other book, is to be 
regarded as the servant of reason, and not reason as the servant 
of it. Keason must sit in judgment upon the Bible, as well as 
upon all things else : — for it is the voice of God in the soul, and 
nothing must ever be allowed to be exalted above it. In reply 
to the folly, which makes reason inferior or antagonistic to faith, 
we declare it to be the basis of all true faith and repugnant to 
no true faith. Keason, in a word, is religion ; and the one duty 
of every man is to bring his passions and appetites and whole 
self into subjection to it. The most reasonable person in 
Peterboro is the best Christian in Peterboro. Most ^happily 
chosen is the word where Paul calls religion a reasonable 
service. 

But it is said that reason is not competent to pass upon reli- 
gious questions. Jesus however says it is. "Why judge ye 
not even of yourselves what is right?" He came to throw men 
back upon their own consciousness of right and wrong, and to 
hold them to the deductions and confessions of their own reason. 
And does not Paul also teach the sufficiency of reason in the 
first chapter of Eomans, (19, 20, 21 )? 

It is true that the reason of most men is greatly perverted. 
It is true that in innumerable instances it is reduced to little 
better than a compound of passion and prejudice : — or, to speak 
with perhaps more philosophical correctness, such a compound 
is allowed to take the place of reason. Nevertheless reason, 
poor guide though we may make it, is our only legitimate guide. 
It may lead us to ruin. Still we are not at liberty to give it up 
for any other leader : no, not for church, nor pope, nor Bible. 
If we have debased and corrupted our reason, we alone arc re- 
sponsible for the wrong, and we alone must bear the loss. What 
was due from us when we had a right reason is equally due 



10 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

from US wlien we have destroyed or supplanted it. We can not 
cancel our obligations by our crimes. 

Our acknowledgment of the absolute and supreme authority 
of the Bible is claimed on the ground of its inspiration. But 
where is the proof that it is inspired ? Is it in the assertion to 
this end of the churches and clergy ? Is it to be looked for in 
what are called external evidences — which by the way are to 
be searched after in that stream of ignorant and superstitious 
traditions, which has come down to our age ? Oh ! no. The 
proof of the inspiration is to be looked for alone in the pages of 
the Bible. If not found there, it can be found no where. More- 
over, every man must, and upon his own responsibility, judge of 
the proof for himself. 

I do myself believe that most of the writers of the Bible were 
inspired. All however that I mean by their inspiration is that 
special flowing of the divine mind into the human mind, of 
which they enjoy the most, who walk the closest with God. 
Thus blessed were prophets and apostles. Subjects of this 
inspiration there are in every age. The sublime pages of Paul 
prove that he was largely inspired. But he is not infallible. 
He does not claim to be. 

I believe in the Bible. That is, I believe in its great unchange- 
able principles and everlasting truths, and in all of it which is 
in harmony with those principles and truths. If there are parts 
of it, which my reason shall ever teach me are not in such har- 
mony, these I will reject. For these, to use a law phrase, are 
void for inconsistency, and are no part of the Bible. 

In what I said of inspiration, I had no reference to the power 
to tell future events. That events were foretold by some of the 
writers of the Bible I can not doubt. 

I said that reason has been overridden by the Bible. The 
vast evil consequences of it no human mind can measure. 
Why, for instance, is it that slavery is able to make so plausible 
and effective a defense of itself ? It is because its defenders 
have been allowed to take it out of the jurisdiction of reason, 
and submit its claims to the Bible. So, too, war and polygamy 
and the drinking of intoxicating liquors and the wrongs suffered 
by woman have done not a little to prolong their existence by 
fleeing from their prompt condemnation in the court of reason 
to try what they can make for themselves out of certain cunning 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 11 

interpretations of the Bible. Alas I that it should ever be left 
to the decision of a book whether these naked and enormous 
crimes are or are not crimes ! For what book is there that men 
can not read in any and every way to suit their interests ? The 
matchless crime of slavery is instantly condemned by not only 
the enlightened reason of manhood but the untutored instincts 
of childhood. IIow absurd then to submit its character to the 
decision of pages and philology and exegesis — to the decision, 
which learning and ingenuity are as like to draw to the one side 
as to the other ! 

If men are so low in understanding as to need a Bible to teach 
them the moral character of the crimes I have enumerated, then 
are they too low in understanding to be helped by a Bible. 
Then may Bibles be made as well for donkeys and monkeys as 
for men. 

Who is willing to be a slave ? No one. And this proves 
that the reason of man and the whole nature of man universally 
condemn slavery. Hence does it prove that if there is any 
thing in the Bible for slavery, the Bible is so far wrong. 

Again, how speedy and certain the conclusion we are brought 
to by experience, observation, science, study of the laWs of life 
and health, that intoxicating liquors are unfit for a beverage ! 
And who but a very wicked or a very stupid man will appeal 
from that conclusion to the Bible or to any thing else ? 

Who too but such a man will ever feel it necessary to go to 
the Bible to put polygamy on trial? Higher authority and 
more certain evidence than the Bible have we on this point as 
well as on the point of rum-drinking, The census tables in all 
ages and all nations dispose of the question of polygamy. They 
prove the equal numbers of the sexes, and confirm the declara- 
tion of Jesus that God made us "male and female" — only one 
woman for one man, and only one man for one woman. Who- 
ever therefore gets a plurality of wives robs his brother ; and 
whoever gets a plurality of husbands robs her sister ; — just as 
the people who get two or three farms apiece have made them- 
selves guilty of robbing the landless. By the way, ou^ Govern- 
ment shrinks from putting down its foot upon polygcwny where 
it is made a religious institution. But the province of govern- 
ment is to uphold the great natural rights of its subjects ; — and 
none the less so where the violation of these rights is under the 



12 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

cover and in the name of religion. The rery same obligation 
rests on government to suppress polygamy that rests on it to sup- 
press land-monopoly. The very same obligation to punish the 
robbing men of women as to punish the robbing men of land. 

Again, let the Bible say what it will of war, who in the light 
of reason does not condemn it as madness and murder ? 

And what too, if, as is held by many, Paul does teach that 
woman as compared with man is an inferior order of being ? — 
who that receives such insane teaching is fit to have a wife or 
a daughter ? 

Lest what I have now said might be construed into the ad- 
mission that these crimes are countenanced by the Bible, I take 
this occasion to affirm that no one of them finds the least shel- 
ter in the principles of that blessed book. Neither the super- 
stitious regard for the Bible and the superstitious assumptions 
in its behalf on the one hand ; nor the assaults, which atheism, 
skepticism, and ungodly rationalism make upon it on the other, 
can ever shake the confidence which he reposes in it, who, in 
the light of a true and therefore reverent reason, has studied 
the claims of this volume to acceptance, honor, love, and obedi- 
ence. 

I arraigned our clergymen for holding that the doctrine of 
an eternal hell must be believed in, in order to salvation. For 
be the doctrine true or false, I can not think that we shall be 
either saved or lost by any views we may entertain of it. I 
now arraign them for their nndoubting faith in it. 'No war- 
rant have they either to preach or to entertain a faith in it 
which is free from all doubts. 

I confeste — perhaps to my shame and condemnation — that I 
do not feel a deep and abiding interest in the next stage of our 
being. Far less concerned am I to know what is the future 
state than to know and do the duties of the present. 

I believe in future punishment. It is a reasonable doctrine. 
It is philosophically and necessarily true. Every where our 
character must determine our condition. Every man on dying 
must go to his own place — to the place for which his character 
fits him. The death of his body can no more afi'ect his charac- 
ter than the breaking of his spectacles or cane. His body, no 
more than his spectacles or cane, is a part of himself. That his 
character will surely remain eternally unchanged, I deny that 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 13 

any one has the riglit to affirm. Jude teaches that persons can 
fall from heaven. Why then may they not rise from hell ? For 
aught we can certainly know, there may be room in the life to 
come for repentance as well as apostasy. In one sense of " ever- 
lasting punishment," I am an undoubting believer in it : — for I 
can not doubt that the punishment of the sinner will be as ever- 
lasting as his sin. 

Whilst I confess that I have no certain apprehensions of the 
kind or degree or continuance of either future punishment or 
future enjoyment ; I nevertheless confidently maintain that 
enough knowledge for me and for all men on this point is that 
in the life to come "it shall be well" with the righteous and 
"ill" with the wicked; and that the "Judge of all the earth 
will do right," as well there as here. Whilst earth is our home, 
let us discharge with alacrity and delight the duties of earth. 
In that way, and in that way only, shall we be fitted for heaven. 
In that way, and in that way only, shall we get to heaven. 

I spoke of the future as a place. I had perhaps better call it 
a state. That there are millions of heavens and millions of 
hells — that they are in short as numerous as are the differences 
in moral character — better answers my conception. 

I blamed the clergy for holding that they must perish who 
subscribe not to the doctrine of the divinity of Christ. For be 
the doctrine true or false, there is no right to attribute such 
consequences to its rejection. I also blame them for refusing 
to admit even the smallest doubt of the truth of the doctrine- 
In the mind of every man who allows his reason free play there 
is certainly room for such a doubt. But whether Christ is God 
or man I leave to be discussed by those who have a taste for 
speculative discussions. It suffices me to see in Him the in- 
fallible teacher of religious truth, the perfect representative and 
the fullest and most winning expression of His Father. I wel- 
come Him as " God manifest in the flesh." My largest concep- 
tions of wisdom, justice, love are more than realized in Ilim : 
and it is my largest conceptions of these and other attributes of 
Deity, that make up the Deity I love and honor. Surely, if 
Lady Guion may say : " The providences of God are God," I 
may say : The attributes of God are God. 

The mission of Christ to the world was to give all needed ex- 
tension to the acquaintance of man with God. The heavens 



14 THE EELIGION OF REASON. 

above and the earth, beneath ; the instructive course of provi- 
dence ; and the more instructive teachings of the Spirit were 
insufficient to this end without the manifestation of God in 
Christ. Is it said that His mission was to die for the world? I 
answer that His death was incidental to His faithful exhibition 
of His Father's character. It was because He was like God 
that He was crucified. 

The one thing else for which I blamed our clergymen was 
their making faith in the doctrine of the atonement essential to 
salvation. But are they not also blameworthy for making 
themselves so perfectly and stubbornly certain of the truth of 
the doctrine? 

I am not disposed to controvert the doctrine. In my eye 
there is none of that absurdity in it, which is so freely imputed 
to it. For aught I see, it might have been decreed in the coun- 
sels of heaven, that a being of Christ's superior dignity must die 
for man in order that the claims of the law be satisfied ; in or- 
der that God "might be just, and the justifier" of man. 

But although I make no opposition to the doctrine, nor even 
object to being numbered with those who subscribe to it, I 
nevertheless can not feel, as do many, that it is true beyond aU 
possible question. Moreover, I can not see why I should love 
and honor Christ any the less, if it shall turn out that the law, 
instead of being satisfied by the righteousness of Christ, is sat- 
isfied by the righteousness, which His spirit has wrought in 
them who love him. That Christ lived and suffered and died 
for men is abundant reason for their giving Him all possible 
love and honor, without their stopping to calculate what they 
iiave gained by Him. Moreover, it is the privilege of every 
good man to know that the claims of the law against himself 
are satisfied. The fact that he is good — that he loves God and 
nian — is the highest possible proof he can have that they are 
satisfied. Paul closes his enumeration of virtues with the de- 
claration : "Against such there is no law." No more can there 
be law against him who is adorned with these virtues. Admit- 
ting the doctrine of the atonement to be certainly and entirely 
true, nevertheless the importance of our understanding and be- 
lieving it is greatly overrated. But the importance of our be- 
lieving that Jesus lived, and suffered, and died for man is in no 
danger of being overrated : — for, thus believing and understand- 



THE RELIGION OF KEASON. 15 

ing, our hearts are drawn out in love to Him, and to the truth^ 
and to our fellow-men, and to our Father. This is the needed 
effect upon us of the Advent. But on what precise principles 
it is, and whether by any of the supposed expedients or techni- 
calities that our accounts in the books of heaven are balanced, 
is a matter we may safely leave among " the secret things which 
belong unto the Lord our God." 

Again, I can not, because Paul seems to inculcate the doctrine 
of the Atonement, feel entirely certain that it is true. He says 
but little of it except in his letter to the Jews : — and in what 
he says of it to them, he is perhaps more swayed by his and 
their common education than by any revelations or inspirations. 
We must not forget that the Jewish education was full of aton- 
ing sacrifices. From early childhood the Jew was taught to 
believe that the animal killed in sacrifice atoned for the sins of 
an individual or a family. How natural then was it for Paul 
to speak to his countrymen of Jesus, who did indeed die for the 
world as One who had atoned for the sins of the world ! Thus 
natural was it for John to say, as he looked upon Jesus : " Behold 
the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world !" He 
virtually said : " Behold not the literal lamb which taketh away 
the sin of but an individual or a family : but behold th^ figu- 
rative lamb — ^the lamb of God — which taketh away the sin of 
the world !" If the atonement of Christ is but a mere fancy, 
it is nevertheless not strange that a Jew should entertain it. So 
fully possessed was he of the idea of atonement, that it must 
have been very easy for him to fancy a sufferer for another to 
be an atoning sufferer. 

I do not forget that the animal sacrifices are what is most re- 
lied on to prove the truth of the doctrine of the atonement. 
Those sacrifices do indeed seem to be meet offerings to a cruel, 
bloody pagan God. Moreover, according to Paul (Heb. 10 : 6) 
Jesus testified that His Father had "had no pleasure" in them ; 
and according to Jeremiah (7 : 22) God Himself declared that He 
" commanded them" not. Still it must be confessed that there 
is a vast amount of evidence in the Bible that God did com- 
mand these sacrifices. If however we must yield to this evi- 
dence, it nevertheless remains to be proved that they are types 
of the sacrifice in which the Lord Jesus offered up Himself. 
May not a man be good and yet doubt the sufficiency of the 



16 THE EELIGION OF REASON. 

proof to this end ? One thing more under this head. Instead 
of the vulgar view of the atonement, may not Christ be regard- 
ed as in effect an atoning sacrifice because He saves men from 
the penalty of the law by the converting influences, which flow 
out upon them from his life and death ? 

But I will weary you no further with words about " the doc- 
trines." My neighbors, we are all aware that a low place in the 
ecclesiastical world is assigned to Peterboro. For many, many 
years, we have been giving great offense to the clergy and the 
churches. And yet, I must think, that this little village — 
probably the only spot in the State to which the Anti-Slavery 
Society, that was mobbed out of Utica nearly a quarter of a 
century ago, could retreat in safety — is, in respect to a sound 
and rational religion, greatly in advance of almost every other 
place in the land. Our families with certainly very few exceptions 
dwell together in peace and love ; and in this there is no little 
proof that the religion of Jesus prevails among us. No little 
proof also of this is there in the fact that a great many years 
have passed away since intoxicating drinks were openly sold 
among us : and no little proof too in the fact that the filthy 
vice of snuffing, chewing, and smoking tobacco is held by a 
large share of our people to be disgraceful and sinful. And 
where I ask most emphatically is there a place in all our broad 
land so free as this from the spirit of caste ? Whose table is 
there here to which a black man is not as welcome as a white 
one ? "When I heard the other day that our respectable youth 
of white faces and black faces had mingled together freely in a 
public dance, I confess (although I am not the advocate of pub- 
lic as I am of private dances) that I felt proud of my village. 
Where else in our country has the religion of Jesus achieved a 
conquest so beautiful, so decisive, and so much needed ? Igno- 
rant and unsound as we are held to be in regard to " the doc- 
trines," nevertheless are we not quite as far advanced in human- 
ity and practical Christianity as the places where every hair's 
breadth of the most orthodox interpretation of doctrines is con- 
tended for ? 

There is a wide-spread revival of religion in our country. 
Of what religion time alone can surely tell. It is not Christian- 
ity, if it shall allow the rich to stand aloof from the poor, and 
the people of one complexion to refuse to associate with the 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 17 

people of another. It is not Christianity, if it is like the current 
religion. For the terms which this religion keeps with slavery 
and with the murderous prejudice against the colored races 
proves it to be a spurious and Satanic religion. Why, the very 
first lesson in the school of Christ is to know our brother and 
sister, and to see Christ in every man, woman, and child, be 
they rich or poor, white, red^ or black. The religion, which 
does not go to bind together all human hearts is not the religion 
of the Saviour. A poor opinion of this revival shall I have, if 
there shall still be as much opposition as ever to negro suffrage ; 
and as great unwillingness as ever to mingle complexions in 
the school and church ; and as great readiness as ever to cast 
votes for pro-slavery men. 

Another delightful evidence to my mind that the spirit of 
Christ has wrought great and blessed changes in Petcrboro is 
to be found in the breaking up of our sectarian churhes and in 
the general and growing dislike to sectarianism. God hasten 
the day when, here and elsewhere, there shall no longer be 
Christians, who shall not be deeply ashamed to be called Metho- 
dists, Baptists, Presbyterians, or to pass under any other reli- 
gious party name ! 

But were I to go on and speak all the praises of Peterboro, I 
should still be obliged to confess that she is very far from per- 
fect ; that there is still much in her to be reformed ; and that 
she greatly needs the priceless blessing of a revival of true re- 
ligion. Never will our village be what it should be, until love 
shall reign in all our families and all our hearts ; until an altar 
to God shall be erected in all our homes ; and holiness to the 
Lord be inscribed upon all our business and all our amusements. 

My hearers, the great struggle between the religion of author- 
ity and the religion of reason has begun. It did not begin 
with Martin Luther and the early Protestants. They were still 
creed-bound; and their enslavement to the Bible differed not 
essentially from enslavement to the Church. This struggle is 
chiefly the growth of the last half-century ; and in America 
nothing has contributed to it so much as the Temperance and 
Anti-slavery reforms — since nothing so much as these has awak- 
ened a. sense of human dignity and human rights, and called 
for a common-sense and practical religion. The Protestants are 
wont to disparage the Catholics. Nevertheless the mass of the 
2 



18 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

Protestants are with the Catholics in favor of a religion of au- 
thority and against the religion of reason. At this point they 
are essentially alike. For what submission is there to the Cath- 
olic Church which is more degrading or dwarfing than that 
which Protestants are so inexorably required to yield to the 
ecclesiastical interpretations of the Bible ? 

We are living in an age of great progress — great progress in 
the material, mental, and moral world. Every thing is going 
forward and improving except ecclesiastical religion. That re- 
mains stereotyped and unchangeable. But we thank God for 
the abounding evidence that it will ere long give place to an- 
other and better religion. Already are there dawnings of that 
glad day when the superstitions and absurdities, which have so 
long debased and tormented men, shall have passed away for- 
ever ; and when Christianity in all her reasonableness and 
righteousness shall overspread the whole earth. 

Alas I how little has been accomplished by these superstitions 
and absurdities for the glory of Grod and the good of man ! 
War, slavery, land-monopoly, polygamy, drunkenness, the 
wrongs of woman still remain. The religion of reason — that 
religion which says to man, " Yea, and why even of yourselves 
judge ye not what is right ?" had long ago done away with these 
evils, and turned this sin-smitten, priest-ridden, superstition- 
bound world into a paradise. 

It is often said that we, who are busy in reducing religion to 
reason, are busy, at least in effect, to overthrow it. But to 
bring religion into identity with reason is not to degrade but to 
exalt it. And again, it is not we who endanger religion, but 
they who reduce it to a superstition. There is indeed danger 
that men will break loose from the Bible. But this danger 
springs mainly from the fact that rapidly increasing multitudes 
will no longer consent to bow their necks to a religion of au- 
thority and receive the Bible because it is the Bible rather than 
because their reason has indorsed it. If this book shall be cast 
aside as a superstition, it will be because its friends are unwilling 
that reason and reason only shall pass upon it and interpret it. 
The truth is that the civilization of Christendom is fast outgrow- 
ing the religion of Christendom : — and this is because reason is 
allowed to infuse itself more and more freely into civilization, 
whilst it is still driven away from the precincts of religion. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 19 

No where probably are the people more ready than they are in 
Italy to reject the current Christianity. And this because 
no where is the current Christianity more emphatically a bundle 
of superstitions, and because no where is it more industriously 
and superstitiously urged upon the superstition of the people. 
As an additional reason, no where else are the people opening 
their eyes faster to the religious impositions practised upon 
themselves. In a word, Italy has outgrown her religion. Her 
limbs have become too big for her garments. Italian civiliza- 
tion is for in advance of Italian Christianity. 

My hearers, who among you will to-day espouse this religion 
of reason — this manly and common-sense religion of the lips 
and life of Jesus ? You had been told by great sticklers for 
doctrines, that a very accommodating religion would be pre- 
sented to you on this occasion — a sort of heaven-made-easy 
religion. I beg you to make trial of the religion, which I have 
now presented to you. Try to bring your entire self under the 
reign of reason ; and then you will know that your task is not 
an easy one. Then you will know that only he who is born 
again is adequate to it. Then you will know that only he who 
has been imbued with the spirit of Christ, and has chosen 
Christ for his master and Saviour, is capable of submitting his 
whole being to the demands of reason. Let me not h9wever 
be misunderstood. Notwithstanding what I have just said, 
this religion which I commend to you is not a hard one. It is 
hard to get. But when once gotten it is easy. When by the 
grace and help of God the yoke of Christ is once upon your 
neck, you will find it easy, and His burden light. 

We who inculcate this religion of reason must lay our 
account with great opposition, not to say virulent persecution. 
Because we can not " frame to pronounce" the Shibboleth of 
the churches and clergy we are called infidels. It is the bad 
fashion of the age — it has been the bad fashion of every age — 
to apply doctrinal tests of character, instead of judging men 
"by their fruits." But never is it reasonable or Christian to go 
back of the life to judge of the character. To do so is to be 
guilty of wicked intolerance. If we regard our neighbor's doc- 
trines as unsound, and are nevertheless constrained to acknow- 
ledge his pure and loving and beautiful and reverent life, then 
instead of condemning him for his unsound doctrines, we are 



20 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

to do him double honor for that goodness of his heart, which 
maintains itself in the face of the errors of his understanding : 
and, what is more, we are to thank God for consenting to dwell 
bj His spirit in a heart, which is coupled with a wrong head. 

I close with reminding my fellow -laborers, that as we are 
> now embarked in the most difficult of all reforms, we are under 
especial need of remembering Him whose name is " Strength." 
Dismayed and overcome we surely shall be, unless our hearts 
go out constantly for His support. When a quarter of a cen- 
tury ago, we had to encounter a very strong anti-temperance 
and pro-slavery public sentiment, we had fainted unless we had 
made the Lord God our help. But then the churches were 
divided and the clergy also. No very small share of them 
were with us. Far different is it now when we have to breast 
the well nigh entirely undivided forces of both churches and 
clergy, and all that appalling public sentiment, which such 
forces are able to generate. In our determination to resist the 
mad intolerance, which judges character by those ever harped- 
on doctrines about which even among the best of men there will 
ever be as many minds as there are differences of temperament 
and education; and in our determination to acknowledge no 
other test of character than the life, we may be sure that we 
shall not fail to provoke such an array against ourselves, as 
will be utterly overwhelming, if we put not our trust in the 
living God. Brave then let us be to meet the frowns of our 
fellows : but all the while let us be meek and humble in the 
consciousness that our bravery will die, and our cause be de- 
feated, unless we keep our hearts in contact with the Divine 
heart, and draw from thence the courage and strength, which 
that great heart can alone supply. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

A DISCOURSE BY GERRIT SMITH. 

IN FETERBOR-O, J^IN". 23, 1859. 



A YEAR ago I gave you a discourse in favor of tlie religion 
of reason. To-day I give you another. That discourse, wher- 
ever it circulated, was severely criticised, and this will probably 
experience no more tender treatment than did that. 

Were men but mere machines, they could reflect but little 
honor on their Maker. It is because they are free agents — free 
to choose to know Grod, and free to be ignorant of Him — free 
to grow either in likeness or unlikeness to Him — that they are 
capable of doing Him large honor. That day, if it shall ever 
come, in which all the intelligent creatures of His universe shall 
choose this divine knowledge, will realize our present concep- 
tions of the highest possible glorification of Grod. For the 
power of this knowledge is to produce in all who choose it 
likeness to Him : and likeness to Him is the greatest honor that 
can be rendered to Him. Indeed, so far as we can see, is not 
the making of this likeness perfect and universal, the one work 
of God and of all who through His renovating grace become 
"workers together with Him ?" The prophet says : "And he 
shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver." A beautiful fancy 
connected with these words is that as the silversmith has suffi- 
ciently purified the metal when it is brought to reflect his fiicc 
perfectly, so God will be satisfied with the progTCss of a human 
character when He shall see in it his own. 

As, then, our likeness to God is the highest honor we are 
capable of yielding Him, so, to grow in this likeness, should be 



22 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

our incessant and absorbing aim. That it is also our own high- 
est enjoyment is manifest. Though of this we are to make 
comparatively trivial account. Since there is no other way in 
which we can so unequivocally and fully testify our regard for 
our earthly friend, as in studying his character, and copying 
his virtues, so the best praise we can offer God is that likeness 
to Him which results from our deep interest in his character 
through our knowledge and love of it. 

That the one great duty of life is to grow in resemblance to 
God, was deeply felt by the Psalmist, when he exclaimed: "I 
shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness." Nor less 
deeply was it felt by the Apostle, when prompted to say : " We 
know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him." 

The law of our assimilation to the ruling interests of our 
hearts operates no less surely and rapidly in upward than in 
downward directions. All see how certain and swift is the 
miser's process for shrivelling his soul. All see that the sensu- 
alist sinks his whole nature to the level of his sensuality. All 
see that the character of the ambitious man derives its color and 
cast from no higher objects than those which come within the 
range of his ambition. But no less true is it that he who makes 
God his study and desire becomes godlike. He discerns, com- 
prehends and conforms to the divine principles. Thankfully 
and joyfully does he fall in with the divine methods and arrange- 
ments. Habitually and impressively does his life reflect much 
of the divine wisdom and beauty. Thus does he go forward, 
fulfilling the one grand purpose of his existence — assimilation 
to his heavenly Father — until, at length, his heart freed from 
all evil, and his intellect emerged from all darkness, he stands 
like the Angel of the Apocalypse in the very sun. 

That likeness to God results from knowing Him, is taught by 
the Apostle when he says : "We" shall be like Him, for we 
shall see Him as He is." To know God is to love Him ; and 
we can not love Him without being like Him. How, then, we 
can best study the Divine character to the end that our own 
shall most resemble it, is the great problem which every man is 
to solve, and with the practical solutions of which he is to make 
beautiful and blessed every day of his life. 

The sun, moon and stars, and the globe we inhabit, are all 
witnesses for God. Innumerable other sources are there which 



TUE RELIGION OF REASON. 23 

flow with divine knowledge. The whole course of providence 
testifies that God is strong and wise and good. Very emphatic 
is such testimony through those men and women who, here and 
there in all ages, have by their large partaking and faithful 
illustration of the Divine Spirit taught the world the character 
and excellence of that Spirit. Prophets there have been whose 
mighty words and sublime lives were rich manifestations of 
God. High above them all is his ''beloved Son," Jesus, " full 
of grace and truth," Jesus, " filled with all the fullness of God," 
Jesus, such an incarnation of the divine wisdom and goodness 
and loveliness, such a matchless exhibition of the divine charac- 
ter as made it no exaggeration in the Apostle to call him " God 
manifest in the flesh." " Looking unto Jesus," unto this bright- 
est and fullest expression of God, is preeminently the means 
for increasing in the knowledge, love and likeness of God. 

Thus abundant are the means for acquainting ourselves with 
God. We can not remain ignorant of Him if we are disposed 
to study Hira. We may know Him, if we will, and as we have 
already said, to know Him is to love Him and be like Him. 
The diligent and honest student can learn '^ by the things that 
are made," what is that perfect law that converts the soul. But 
in the words and lives of prophets, and above all in the words 
and life of Jesus, he can learn it more surely, comprehensively, 
and accurately. 

Such are the circumstances of men. Now, which in these 
circumstances is the religion best adapted to promote their like- 
ness to God ? There are but two religions in the world. One 
is that of nature or reason ; and the ten thousand varieties of 
the other all come properly under the name of the conventional 
or doctrinal religion. 

I made preeminent the "looking unto Jesus." I might with 
truth have said that it surpasses the sum total of all other means 
for producing likeness to God. But alas ! the religious world, 
instead of " looking unto Jesus," is chiefly busy with the doc- 
trinal systems and questions which sectaries and creed-mong- 
ers have coupled with his name ! Immeasurably more import- 
ant do they count it to have orthodox views in regard to the 
trinity, the atonement, and the future life, than to imbibe the 
spirit of Christ and to submit all the relations and departments 
and duties of life to the sway of his principles. 



24 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

The prevalent idea is that Jesus introduced a new religion, 
and made essential to salvation faith in his Godship, the atone- 
ment, and in other doctrines peculiar to that religion. But he 
did not. 

The religion which Jesus so perfectly illustrated with his lips 
and life was no other than the religion of reason — that one and 
only true religion which is adapted to all ages and all peoples, 
and which stands opposed to all those fabrications of the cun- 
ning, and all those superstitions of the credulous, which are 
called religion. These fabrications and superstitions, and, in 
short, every other religion than that of reason, Jesus confronted. 
No cabalism or mysticism found any favor with him. The re- 
ligion he taught was so obviously true as to make its appeal to 
natural sense and universal intuition. So simple was it that he 
found no occasion for sending men to books and priests to 
acquire an understanding of it. On the contrary, he put them 
upon their own convictions for the solution of its problems, and 
asked them: "Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is 
right ?" He found reason outraged by monstrous claims in the 
name of religion : and the one work of his ministry — the one 
work which, amid all the storms of passion and prejudice and 
bigotry he pursued so imfalteringly and calmly and sublimely 
— was to reestablish the dominion of reason. He found com- 
mon-sense reduced to a ruinous discount by its concessions to 
religious tricks and fooleries ; and he undertook to restore it to 
par. Such was then and is now the whole of the religion of 
Jesus. It is a common-sense religion. Wide as is its realm, it 
is but commensurate with common-sense, and one with it. To 
bring the whole man and the whole life under the reign of rea- 
son is its sole office. The true religion is nothing more nor 
less than a "reasonable service;" and wherever there is the 
most reasonable man, there is the most truly religious man. 

We denied that Jesus made faith in certain doctrines essen- 
tial to salvation. Nor is it true that he made faith in his literal 
self thus essential. What he means by faith in himself is faith 
in the Christ principle and Christ character. Hence, salvation 
may come to him who has never heard of Christ. Cordially to 
believe in that principle of divine goodness, and truly to possess 
the character which grows out of this cordial belief, is the suffi- 
cient, ay, and the sole salvation. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 25 

The cliurcli and priestliood will nevertheless long continue to 
hold that this faith in doctrines is essential. For, beside the 
force of habit in the case, they will hardly be insensible to the 
fact that their surrender of the necessity of this faith would 
involve the surrender of themselves. AVhen the true religion 
shall prevail, and men shall be judged by their life and charac- 
ter rather than by their adoption or rejection of creeds, the 
church, in the common-sense of the word, will have disap- 
peared, and the priesthood have lost its vocation. When there 
shall be no more battles to fight concerning the doctrines, there 
will be no more occasion for sectarian churches ; and when re- 
ligion shall require only a good life and a good character, the 
learning peculiar to a priest will be as superfluous for the cure 
of souls as is that of a geologist to teach the farmer how to hold 
his plow, or that of a lawyer to negotiate the simple exchange 
of a bushel of wheat for a piece of meat. Every other religion 
must have its priesthood, for a scholastic training is necessary 
to unravel its knots. Every other religion must have an order 
of men capable of exploring its mysteries. But in the religion 
of Jesus there are no knots and no mysteries. I admit that 
both heaven and earth are full of mysteries. Paul, in writing 
to Timothy, refers to some of them. But I deny that any of 
them come within the range of the true religion. All its essen- 
tial teachings are intelligible to common-sense. Nay, simple 
love is the fulfilling of its whole law. Hence, this religion 
needs no priesthood, unless it be that " royal priesthood" in 
which there are no grades, and to which every disciple, however 
learned or unlearned, belongs. How different this religion, the 
disciples of which are each his own priest, from those religions 
which require a sacerdotal caste to study their volumes, their 
legendary and mystic lore ! How different from those religions 
which require a class of magicians because the religions them- 
selves are magic ! 

Nothing can be more absurd than to make faith in the doc- 
trines the pivot of salvation. For this is to make such faith 
the test of character, since it must turn exclusively upon our 
character whether we are saved or lost. But such faith is not 
absolutely subject to our control, and therefore can not be a test 
of character. To the unqualified proposition that men can not, 
and arc not, bound to govern their beliefs, I confess I do not 



26 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

assent. Every man is bound to believe that goodness is good- 
ness, and wickedness is wickedness — for this lie can do if his 
moral aifections are right, and it is in his power to have them 
right. But when the question is one of the understanding 
rather than of the heart, then owing to constitutional or educa- 
tional differences, one man will believe and another disbelieve ; 
one man will come to one conclusion, and another to another. 
Hence, while a person must not be excused for saying he can 
not believe it wrong to lie and steal, he may be for not seeing 
sufficient evidence to warrant the popular view of the atone- 
ment and of the Trinity. Unbelief in the one case is necessarily 
connected with a wicked heart. In the other, it may exist in 
connection with the holiest heart. 

The conventional or doctrinal religion is not adapted to make 
men good. It teaches that we must believe the doctrines in 
order to be good, and that it is illegitimate and vain to seek to 
become good in any other way. Hence, they who receive this 
teaching, instead of trying to be good, try to believe the doc- 
trines. Hence, too, they are not expected to be good, and do 
not tbemselves expect to be good until they have believed 
them. Again, many may never be able to believe them : and 
again, many give abundant proof in their lives that tlie doc- 
trines may be believed without making the believer good. 
Moreover, whatever the goodness of those who are so strenuous 
for the doctrines, there is generally coupled with their strenu- 
ousness the uncharitable condemnation of all who are unable to 
believe them ; and this intolerance is, to say the least, a great 
blemish, and drawback upon their type of goodness. Only here 
and there is it that the goodness of these excessively doctrinal 
religionists rises above this intolerance. 

Absurd, indeed, is it to require men, on peril of perdi- 
tion, to subscribe to certain explanations of certain facts in 
religion. The fact that Christ died for us, all agree to. But it 
is held that we are as much bound, and that it is as important, 
to agree to certain speculations about it, and to certain systems 
of faith built upon it, as to the fact itself Again, we are 
agreed that Christ spoke the words of his Father. But it is 
held that we must perish unless we can bring ourselves to the 
conclusion that he was, in respect to all tlie essential attributes 
of Deity, one with liis Father. The f.ict^ too, that we shall in 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 27 

the next life find it well witli the righteous and ill with the 
wicked, and that all should cherish a deep and abiding sense oi 
their accountability, is denied by none of us. But in vain, too, 
is all this, unless we subscribe to certain views of heaven and 
hell. 

As well may it be said that a man must not plow, nor sow, 
nor reap, until he can understand how his crops grow, as that 
he must not enter upon a religious life and expect to be good 
until he can comprehend the doctrines and philosophy of reli- 
gion. At many points in them the most learned, wise, and holy 
differ widely. The masses, of course, do. Indeed, it is not ex- 
pected that they should comprehend these things. Their faith 
in them, as all honest theologians will readily admit, is not ex- 
pected to be comprehensive and intelligent, but only narrow, 
superstitious, blind. 

I have not been arguing that the prevalent doctrines and 
philosophy of religion are false and worthless. There is much 
of truth and value in them. All I insist on is that the import- 
ance of a full and precise knowledge of them is overrated ; and 
that mistakes in regard to them are not necessarily fatal. For 
instance, a man may be good, and yet not see that he who ^^in- 
creased in wisdom and in favor with God," and who " learned by 
the things he suffered/' and who confessed his ignorance of the 
times of future events, is the all- wise and unchangeable God. 
A man may be good, though he can not see the reasonableness 
of the theory of the twofold nature of Christ, and consequently 
can not be able to reconcile with absolute divine perfection, 
either this want or this growth of knowledge. Again, a man 
may conceive that God can delegate to Jesus or another agent 
power enough to enable him to build a world ; and he may 
acquiesce even in the giving of the name of God to him who 
wields this great power of God. Nevertheless he may shrink 
from admitting the agent to be the very God. So, too, he may 
feel it proper to worship Christ, although unconvinced that 
Christ is the one God. For he may hold that truth, wherever 
it is, is worthy to be worshipped ; and that in Christ is its per- 
fect personification. Kow, I do not say that this man is right 
in all, or even in any of this. But I do say that however 
wrong he may be in it, he may nevertheless be good. Another 
thing I would say is, a man may be good, and yet not fall in 



28 THE EELIGION OF REASON". 

■with all the popular views of the atonement. He may see that 
suffering one for another, even to the laying down of life, is 
altogether reasonable. But that God should be angry with his 
children, and should require an innocent victim to appease his 
wrath, may strike him as an exceedingly unreasonable part of 
the ecclesiastical machinery. It may strike him as turning the 
loving Father into a bloody pagan deity. A man may be good, 
and yet believe that the hearty repentance of the sinner is of 
itself sufficient ground for his forgiveness. He may even be- 
lieve that Jesus teaches this in the parable of the prodigal son. 

That the early Christians interpreted the atonement as a ma- 
jority of modern Christians do, is perhaps true ; for such inter- 
pretation would be a very natural outgrowth of Jewish educa- 
tion. Beautiful and impressive to the Jew must have been the 
analogy, however real or fanciful, between the literal sacrifice 
and Christ — ^between the lamb slain for the sin of an individual 
or a family, and "the Lamb of Grod which taketh away the sins 
of the world." The argument for receiving and relying on 
Christ derived from this analogy must have been very imposing 
to the Jewish mind. 

But it is said that all this philosophy, and all these doctrines, 
were taught by Jesus. If they were, it does not follow that 
our misapprehensions of them would make our salvation im- 
possible. But how can we be sure that they were all taught by 
him ? The Bible can not make us entirely sure of it. For it 
is, at the most, a record of but the substance of what Jesus 
spoke — certainly not always of his precise words. He did not 
write them. Kor were they written as they fell from his lips ; 
nor probably until many years after. Hence, we may not have 
so much as the substance of what he said in every recorded in- 
stance. The idea that the authors of their respective parts of 
the Bible were moved by God to write, word by word, and 
that, by a perpetual miracle, every word has been preserved 
from all possible change in itself and in its connections, is quite 
too superstitious and absurd to be entertained by any reasonable 
mind. Another fact of great account in interpreting the Bible 
is, that Jesus was a poet, and that few poets have ever spoken 
so figuratively and hyperbolically. They who mistake his pic- 
ture-language for words of philosophical precision will be liable 
to construe him very absurdly. Let me not be taken as under- 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 29 

rating Jesus bj calling him a poet. The poet is the superior 
being. He deals with the essence and soul of things — common 
minds with but their body and phenomena. 

But to return to the chief duty inculcated in this discourse — 
growing in likeness to God. In saying that this is to be at- 
tained by " looking unto Jesus," I did not mean that supersti- 
tious looking, which expects in return the magic transformation 
of the looker, but that rational looking to his principles, virtues, 
spirit, life, which is accompanied by the deepest yearnings of 
the soul to make them all our own. It is in this wise that we 
become like Christ ; and likeness to Christ is likeness to G-od. 
For notwithstanding his repeated acknowledgment of inferiority 
to the Father, he claimed that he is one with Him. If he is 
not the Father, nevertheless he has the spirit of the Father. 
That he is not the Father otherwise than in spirit and character, 
is, perhaps, inferable from his prayer that his disciples may be- 
come one even as he and the Father are one. But the oneness 
of his disciples can be no further than in spirit and character. 

How insulting to Grod and degrading to man is this sacred 
sorcery which is put in the place of the religion of reason I 
How false every view of the new birth, (which I admit who- 
ever is saved must experience,) that makes it either more or 
less than a new character ! How foolish and fanatical every 
expectation of a salvation, which does not consist and prove 
itself in a new and good life ! But that a new character and a 
new and good life are not what the mass of religionists under- 
stand by the salvation of which they profess themselves to be 
subjects, is manifest from the fact that in character and life they 
are undistinguishable from others. They are no less enslaved 
to party than are others ; and such enslavement is among the 
very strongest proofs that the subject of it moves upon a low 
plane of being, and is unfitted for a higher. It has often 
occurred to me that as the pala3ontologist has his Silurian and 
Old Ked Sandstone periods, his Carboniferous and other forma- 
tions in which to pursue his study of fossil plants and animals, 
so they, who thousands of centuries hence shall write the his- 
tory of man, will also break up the past into large divisions. 
Instead of the petty distinction of a Greek or Eoman age, they 
will grasp under one name ten thousand and twice ten thou- 
sand years. What name will they give to our times ? What 



80 THE RELIGION OF REASON". 

else can it be than tTie age of party ? It promises to be a long 
age. It has already run through several thousand years ; and 
judging from the present sway of party, there is a much longer 
race before it. How the palaeontologists gloat over their dis- 
coveries ! But far greater will be the joy of these historians 
when, in digging for their fossils, they shall strike upon such a 
rich specimen of party architects and party magicians as a Van 
Buren, a Buchanan, or a Douglas ! or upon an eminent Presby- 
terian or Methodist, or other sectarian leader ! 

Hasten, O God, the coming of the age of individualism ! 
that age in which men shall scorn to work for party, and to be 
helped by party ; in which they shall identify themselves with 
all mankind and work for all mankind, and aspire to no better 
lot in life than their individual merits under Heaven's blessing 
can earn for them ! 

I said that our religionists are generally the slaves of party. 
Ask them, for instance, to help you put a stop to sectarianism ; 
to help you overcome that monster who drags down and dwarfs 
so large a share of the whole human family — and you ask in 
vain. They prefer adhering to their religious parties, and re- 
maining in their Baptist, Episcopal and other sectarian in 
closures, to identifying themselves with all the friends of right- 
eousness. In a word, they prefer gratifying a narrow^ and party 
spirit, to cultivating one that is broad and catholic. Entreat them 
to help you elect law-makers who will shut the dram-shop, and 
thereby dry the tears of tens of thousands of wives and mothers, 
and make murder, and the blasphemies of drunken lips and 
other great crimes, comparatively rare, and in the face of your 
entreaties they will cling to their political party, and vote for 
rum-drinkers and rum-sellers, and rum-makers. Or if you en- 
treat them to take pity on the fugitive slave, and wield their 
political power against kidnappers, you will find how much 
stronger is their attachment to party than to freedom and jus- 
tice and mercy ; and how much more ready they are in this 
case, as well as in others, to go with the majority against Christ, 
than with the minority for him. These who are doctrinal rather 
than Ohristlike Christians, have a great horror of minorities. 
Their professed Master, when hanging on the cross, and deserted 
by all His disciples, was reduced to a minority of one. But 
these doctrinal Christians have no taste for this lonely condi- 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 31 

tion. Indeed tliey will steer as wide as possible of all minori- 
ties, and for the surest majority. Christians bent on being in 
the majority ! What a solecism I The Bible says : " Thou 
shalt not follow a multitude to do evil." It might say more. 
In this world of abounding wickedness, the multitude can not 
be followed without doing evil. 

What a sad exhibition of party spirit among professing 
Christians was there at the last election ! The religious press 
and the temperance press called on the people to vote for can- 
didates who were willing to let the dram-shop continue its work 
of death, and the kidnapper prowl after his prey through the 
whole length and breadth of our State ! I recollect that one of 
the religious newspapers made an especial and very urgent call 
on praying men to vote for them. The excuse of the religious 
conscience for voting for such candidates is, that they can be 
elected, and that candidates who stand up for God and humanity 
can not be ! Will Christians never learn that, instead of voting 
for candidates who are on the side of wrong, they are bound to 
do all they honestly can to cripple the power and reduce the 
influence of such candidates ! Have I a bad neighbor ? Then 
it should be as much my object to contract the sphere of his 
injuriousness, as to enlarge my good neighbor's sphere of use- 
fulness. All this is obvious in the light of a reasonable reli- 
gion. But alas ! the current religion is divorced from reason ! 

A sad spectacle, indeed, was that to which I have referred. 
So far as our State was concerned, all interest in freedom and 
temperance had nearly died out. Their professed friends had 
witli very few exceptions, gone into the political parties. They 
were no longer professing to abolish Slavery ; but they were 
contenting themselves with idle talk against its extension. They 
no longer proposed to shut up the dram-shop ; and though they 
did not altogether cease to speak for temperance, yet were the 
words of most of them vague and heartless, and more fitted, 
and doubtless more intended to veil their apostasy, and mitigate 
their consciousness of it than to accomplish any good for the 
great reform. In these circumstances a handful aroused them- 
selves to save, if possible, these precious causes from utter ex- 
tinction. They taxed themselves heavily to hire halls and 
presses in which to make their appeals to their old fellow-la- 
borers. But all in vain. The dram-shop and kidnapping were 



82 THE EELIGIOX OF REASON. 

never before so triumphant. The Christianity of the State took 
the side of these institutions. It went exultinglv with the 
sweeping majority, and laughed at and despised the little mi- 
nority. But, thanks to God, such a Christianity is a counterfeit. 
If it were not, then would the real Christianity be as poor and 
detestable a religion as was ever imposed on human credulity. 

I referred to the fact that these professed friends of temper- 
ance, even while stabbing it to the heart, had the effrontery to 
talk for it. They talk for it still ; as much since the election as 
they did before it. They hold meetings and resolve in favor of 
the suppression by Government of the sale of intoxicating 
drinks. All this, too, with as much of an air of sincerity and 
solemnity as if their votes had always corresponded with those 
talks and resolves. 

I confess my alarm at these things. For, manifestly, this 
machinery of Temperance Societies and Temperance Agencies, 
by which these cunning men have served party purposes at the 
expense of corrupting the great body of temperance men and 
ruining the cause of temperance, is to be kept up. And, what 
is more, these cunning men, who study and understand the 
public mind, would not have dared to persevere in their impo- 
sitions upon it, had they not been persuaded of its boundless 
credulity and deep degradation. How, for instance, could a 
gentleman, who spent his time last Fall in electioneering for a 
rum ticket, and in decrying the soundness on temperance of the 
temperance ticket, be bold enough to go from town to town in 
our county with his proposition for shutting up the dram-shop, 
unless he had first convinced himself, that the people are as 
ready to be duped as he is to dupe them ? 

Whence comes it that these professedly religious men can 
behave so unreasonably and wickedly in an election ? It is 
largely owing to the fact that they are misled by their religion. 
Among them are good men, who are really better than their 
religion — their adopted religion — for no man is better than his 
real religion. But in the case of all of them religion has been 
taken on trust ; and is, therefore, an unreasoned and unreasona- 
ble thing, instead of being the precious product of their free and 
sovereign reason. Such persons are for the most part, enslaved 
to the Church instead of being " the Lord's freemen ;" idolaters 
of the Bible rather than worshippers of God. Whither the 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. SiJ 

ChurcTi leads they almost •universally follow. What its au- 
thorized expounders of the Bible say is the Bible, is sufficient 
to satisfy their conscience. 

Every man's religion, to be worth any thing to him, must, 
stand in his own judgment. By his own judgment must his 
life be regulated. The one standard by which he is to try his 
religion must be within and not without him. To that standard 
must he bring the Church — -yes, and the Bible also. Gladly 
must he let them inform his judgment ; but he must never let 
them over-ride it. Even the Bible was made for man, not man 
for the Bible. Even the Bible is the servant, and not the mas- 
ter, of human reason. I must receive nothing at the expense 
of my reason. To honor it, is at all times my highest religious 
duty. For reason is the voice of God within me, commanding 
what is right, and forbidding what is wrong. By my reason 
only can I know Him. 

I do not forget the plausible objections to making reason the 
standard in religion. They are only plausible, however. 

First: the reason of many a raan^ if not of most men^ and in- 
deed of all men, is incompetent to be the standard. Then is it ne- 
cessarily incompetent to choose the standard. For how, if it can 
not decide for itself what is religious truth, can it be capable of 
choosing the church, or creed, or man, or book that shall decide it? 
May I make the Bible the standard ? Certainly not until after 
my reason has passed approvingly upon the claims of the book, 
and that too in the light of the book itself, and not merely nor 
mainly in the light of what is said about it. But if after this 
process I make the Bible the standard, is it not all one with mak- 
ing reason the standard? I add that no man can be a Christian 
whose reason is inadequate to decide what is Christianity. 

Second: Making reason the standard of religion woidd make as 
many religions as there are persons — reason having in every mind 
a more or less different play from vjhat it has in every other mind. 
I admit that there would be a great diversity of religious views, 
though the religion of all holy hearts would be substantially 
the same. But what of this diversity ? Is not such a result of 
the workings of free intelligence infinitely preferable to a con- 
formity which is arrived at by holding reason in abeyance ? 
Oh ! how much longer must men, for the sake of avoiding this 
diversity in religious faith, continue to " go it blind" ? But, 
3 



34 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

beside that this ecclesiastical policy results in the degradation 
of reason, and of the whole man, there is but little harmony- 
secured in return for all this expense. For, brimful as is the 
religious world of efforts to establish a common standard out- 
side of reason, and to enforce conformity, it is also brimful of 
diverse faiths and of relentless quarrels. 

An error as great as common, is that we honor God by sur- 
rendering our judgment to the Church and the Bible. We 
deeply dishonor Him by it. Unswerving fidelity to our con- 
victions is the highest service we are capable of rendering Him ; 
for in our convictions is our highest possible present sense of 
God. The Bible or Church view of God may surpass our 
own immeasurably. But we can not claim the credit of it by 
simply adopting it ; nor until it has become our own by being 
wrought into our convictions, and made a part of ourselves. 
"VVe may adojpt the religion of the Bible and the Church, and 
yet be atheists. For the adoption may simply prove our en- 
slavement to authority, and that we are more willing to be the 
subjects of an unquestioning and blind faith, than to do and 
suffer what is needful in order to become intelligently and truly 
religious. For this very reason, that their religion is riot their 
own — is adopted and superficial instead of inwrought — the 
mass of religionists are atheists. 

But I shall be asked if I do not believe the Bible. I do. I 
believe it to be incomparably the best of books. Daily 
should it be studied and commented on in every school. Daily 
should its pages be pondered in the closet. Every morning 
and every evening should its precious lessons be repeated in 
the assembled family. The purest and sublimest morality is 
that of the Bible. Abundant proof is there in many of its 
' pages that they who spoke or recorded the great words had 
drunk deeper of divine inspiration than any other men. It is 
because they had, that we always derive from this blessed book 
a deeper sense of holiness and a deeper sense of wickedness 
than from any other source. What words so fire our hatred of 
oppression as some which prophets spoke ? When, too, do we 
so much appreciate goodness as w^hile our hearts are melting 
over some of the lip and life-utterances of Jesus ? 

Nevertheless, there are portions of the Bible which are worth 
very little; and which, were they found elsewhere, no one 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 35 

would deem worth mucli. Moreover, if we are shocked at the 
supposition that tliere are mistakes and untruths in it, it is only 
because of our false and superstitious education. We must pass 
upon the Bible just as freely as upon any other book : and no- 
thing in it that is repugnant to our reason must be allowed to 
come into our faith. We are not to reject whatever in it is 
above our present comprehension. That would be most unrea- 
sonable. But, whatever is clearly counter to reason, we owe it 
to reason, to ourselves, and to God to reject. If, for instance, 
there is any passage in the Bible, (I do not say there is one,) in 
which God is represented as being partial — as being guilty, it 
may be, of the monstrous partialit}^ of loving one unborn child 
and hating another — we must not, for the sake of saving the 
reputation and authority of the book, acquiesce in a representa- 
tion that outrages all our just conceptions of God. To save 
these conceptions is infinitely more important than to save the 
book. If, too, we find that Paul (I do not say that we do) re- 
presents woman as inferior to man, or as having lower and less 
rights than man, we must not, to save Paul, sanction his wrong 
against woman. Justice must be accorded to her claims at 
whatever expense to his speculations. 

I am not, in these remarks, denying aught of the value of the 
Bible. Incomputable is that value, if for no other reason than 
that it contains the life of Christ. But I may be asked how, 
since I am not confident that the Bible is all true, I can be con- 
fident that it gives the true life of Christ ? My answer is, that 
such a life could not be fabricated. It must have been sub- 
stantially what the Bible represents it to be. Such a reality 
transcends all the possibilities of fiction. It can not be the coin- 
age of the imagination. It can not be a picture without an orig- 
inal. Besides, had it been within the compass of a good man's 
ability to invent such a life, his goodness would have prevented 
his palming it on the world as a reality. I scarcely need add 
that any approach to such a life lies wholly without the range 
of a bad man's conceptions, and can find no place among his 
possible inventions. And what if it were admitted that such a 
life could be written at this day by Charles Dickens or Mrs. 
Stowe, or other persons of their fertile genius, nevertheless it 
must not be forgotten that it would be written by the light of 
the actual life of Jesus, and would therefore be substantially but 
a copy. 



36 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

Unspeakably happy fact is it that men are outgrowing the 
religions which have afflicted and debased them. An ignorant 
age very naturally submits to a religion of authority ; but an in- 
telligent age, which demands and realizes progress in every other 
direction, will not be content to have the dead past continue to 
furnish the religion of the living present. Signs are rapidly 
multiplying that the time has come for every man to have his 
own religion : not to adopt it from his neighbor, his priest, his 
church ; but to construct it for himself. In the province of 
reason, when pervaded by Divine influences, and especially in 
the life of Jesus, who was the perfect impersonation of reason, 
because He was filled with those illuminating, holy, and sweet 
influences which can alone preserve the freest and fullest exer- 
cise of reason— there are abundant materials for such construc- 
tion. Indeed, as in effect I have already said, what a man has 
to do to answer the calls of the true religion, is to keep all his 
appetites, passions, and in erests in subjection to his reason. 1 
admit that he can not do this without help — the help of that 
same spirit which dwelt in Jesus— and which, by the way, is as 
free to us as it was to him. In a word, all he has to do is to 
keep his reason in the ascendant. Then he will be like God. 
For to obey reason is to obey God, To obey it is to bring our- 
selves into harmony with Him, and to make ourselves partakers 
of His character. To disobey it is to prefer the character of 
rebels and atheists. 

The religions, including even that called Christianity, but 
which is not Christianity, have proved themselves false by their 
failure to overcome the great crimes and abominations. War, 
slavery, drunkenness, and the various oppressions of woman 
still abound. Give however, reason its full play — true reason, 
I mean, and not the mixture of passion and prejudice, which 
they who have stifled the voice of reason, are wont to confound 
with it — and these crimes and abominations would fast disap- 
pear. That they are still making hell on earth is chiefly be- 
cause religions of authority put in pleas for them, and j ustify or 
apologize for them in the name of their sacred books and 
churches. Exalt reason, however, to the place of religion, or 
rather religion to the place of reason, and these crimes and 
abominations will depart. But, they will remain, and be rife 
just as long as there is religious authority to keep them in 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 37 

countenance; just as long as men suffer others to decide religi- 
ous questions for tliem ; to be the keepers of their conscience 
and the moulders of their minds. So long as rum-drinkers and 
slaveholders have a religion distinct from reason, they will run 
to it for permission to continue to drink rum and to be slave- 
holders ; and they will not fail to get it. But once cut them 
off from their doctrinal or conventional religion, and tlirow 
them back upon their reason, and they will find it difficult to 
remain rum-drinkers and slaveholders. The South is full of 
the common religion, and hence the impossibility of peacefully 
dislodging her slavery. It is true that the religion of France 
was not essentially different from that of our own country. 
But so slender was its hold on the public mind, that it could 
not prevent the reason of France from abolishing Slavery. The 
abolition of French Slavery was largely owing to French infi- 
delity. Had that nation been more religious and less rational, 
her slavery would have continued to this day. 

It was the policy of Jesus to cut off the Jews from their spur- 
ious religion, and throw them back upon their convictions, and 
upon themselves. "And why," says he to them, "even of 
yourselves judge ye not what is right ?" The like policy should 
be pursued by the modern reformer. It is as indispensable now 
as it was then to get reason into the place of the current re- 
ligion. 

Our likeness to God ! The religion which has this God-hon- 
oring and man-ennobling aim is to be our religion. Never does 
a man's dignity appear so great as when seen in the light of his 
capacity for resembling his Maker." It is in this' light that he 
is "the temple of God," and is never to be defiled by rum, to- 
%>acco, nt)r any sensuality: And who, viewing man in this 
light, can loe guilty of degrading him in thought, word or deed ? 
Who, having drunk in the spirit of this true religion, and, 
therefore, opened his eyes upon the grandeur of man, can put 
upon his brother's limbs the chains of slavery, or consent to see 
him sunk to the guilty uses to which war sinks its hirelings ? 
Or who, having, under the influences of this true religion, felt 
how great is man, can look with patience on his bondage to a 
political or ecclesiastical party ? 

This religion, then, which recognizes man's capacity for re- 
sembling^ his God, and which inculcates the duties o^rowinoj out 



38 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

of that capacity — this is the only religion which can rid the 
world of the crimes that crowd it and the vices that have con- 
quered it. This alone can shut up the dram-shop, and put an 
end to slavery and the other outrages upon the high nature of 
man. 

But I must proceed to notice some of the charges against 
those who hold the views taken in this discourse. 

We are accused of disparaging Christ because we refuse to be 
tested by certain mystic doctrines. Subscription to these doc- 
trines is held to be essential to his honor. But they make most 
of Christ who, whatever their errors of doctrine, cherish his 
spirit and live his life. On the contrary, they make least of 
him who war upon his spirit and life — ^free however they may 
be, of these doctrinal errors. 

The faith in Christ on which most rely is not that intelligent 
and cordial faith in his principles which good men alone can 
possess. But it is a faith of which wicked as well as good men 
can be the subjects — for it is superstitious, unintelligent and 
blind. 

We hold that they most honor Christ who believe that the 
religion he taught is the religion of simple reason ; and who 
also govern their lives by it. Let me add that I would have 
Christ honored in observing the rites and institutions as well as 
in espousing the comprehensive and essential principles of his 
religion. Let the principles be cordially adopted, and the rites 
and institutions carefully conformed to. For one, I would have 
the friends of Christ baptized with water, and in the manner in 
which he was. For one, I would have them partake of his ap- 
pointed supper, and around a table, and with conversation as 
did he and his disciples. For one, I would have them observe 
a Sabbath, and choose for it the same day of the week which he 
and his disciples did. Even in things which are counted among 
the unessential, it is safer and happier to walk in his steps than 
to depart from them. 

It is charged, too, that we are not Bible men. I admit that 
we are not any further than we live according to its great and 
everlasting principles. They are Bible men whose lives are in 
harmony with those principles ; not they who trample upon 
them, at the same time that they make great merit of theii' pre- 
tended or imao-ined faith in the Bible. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 39 

Anotlier complaint is, that we would abolish the ministry. 
But we would not. We would have the Gospel preached ten- 
fold more abundantly than now. To this end, however, no 
clerical order of men is needed. So simple is the true Gospel 
that he who loves it is well able to preach it, even though he 
may have no more than common-sense and a common educa- 
tion. Here and there arise men of rare power for preaching it. 
Let such be encouraged and enabled to itinerate as did Paul 
and Barnabas among the churches. At the same time let the 
members of every church feel that, however few or unlearned 
they may be, they are, under the divine blessing, able through 
the proper exercise of their gifts to edify each other. 

I admit that a cultivated intellect adds immensely to the 
power of the preacher. But it need not be cultivated in the 
theological school. On the contrary, far more power to preach 
the common-sense, practical gospel of Jesus Christ is to be 
found in that general knowledge which the lawyer, or statesman, 
or enlightened merchant acquires in his intercourse with the 
world, than in the training of those institutions where religion 
IS taught as a trade, and years of apprenticeship are spent to gain 
an understanding of its mysteries. 

We are charged, too, with being Spiritualists. Some of us 
are and some of us are not Spiritualists. But what if we all 
were — still might we not all be Christians ? To be a spiritual- 
ist — ^that is, to believe that spirits can communicate with us — ^is 
no proof that a man is or is not a Christan. His cordial recep- 
tion, as evidenced in his life, of the great essential moral truths 
which come to him, whether in communications from spirits or 
from any other source, this and this alone proves that he is a 
Christian. If Spiritualism has been the occasion of harm to 
some, nevertheless there are others in whom it has wrought 
good. We have neighbors, whose religious life has been greatly 
improved by their interest in Spiritualism. I can not deny that 
Spiritualism is fraught with great evil to those who are foolish 
enough to welcome it as a new religion, and a substitute for 
Christianity. 

A favorite, and certainly a very winning doctrine of the 
Spiritualists, is, that a wicked man attracts wicked spirits, and 
a good man good ones. How protective, purifying, and every 
way happy must be its influence on him wlio truly believes it ! 



40 THE KELIGION OF REASON. 

How efficient the motive it furnishes to avoid a bad and pur- 
sue a good life ! 

I must not to fail to add, in this connection, that the Spiritual- 
ists I met in my tours through the State, last fall, were nearly 
all reformers. They had broken off from both political and 
ecclesiastical parties, and were earnestly and openly devoting 
themselves to the abolition of sectarianism, slavery, intemper- 
ance, and other wrongs. I have no doubt that, in proportion 
to their numbers, Spiritualists cast tenfold as many votes for the 
Abolition and Temperance ticket as did others. Surely such a 
fact is highly commendatory of the influence of Spiritualism. 

It is also said that we are opposed to revivals. We believe 
in revivals of true religion, and rejoice in them. But we con- 
fess that of revivals in general we are very suspicious. And 
why should we not be ? It is true that they serve to fill up the 
churches ; but do they increase the sum total of humanity and 
holiness and happiness ? The revival of last year was preemi- 
nent for extent and commended character. But I am yet to be 
convinced that it has proved a public blessing. Survey the 
leng-th and breadth of our State. Is not sectarian and party spirit, 
that power so mighty to shrivel and sink the soul, as rampant as 
ever ? Was there ever a year in which the use of tobacco in- 
creased faster, or in which there was a more rapid multiplica- 
tion of dram-shops ? In no year among the last thirty, has so 
little interest been taken in the cause of temperance. Indeed, 
at the last election its professed friends seemed to delight in 
pouring contempt upon it. They were as eager to vote for rum 
men as they formerly had been to vote against them. And 
although there is still much talk (part sincere and part hypo- 
critical, and nearly all nonsensical) against the extension of 
Slavery, yet has there never been a year since the dauntless 
3^oung hero, William Lloyd Grarrison, first summoned the nation 
to abolish it, in which has been evinced so little purpose to 
abolish it. 

That there was a very unusual amount of religious tender- 
ness and susceptibility the last year is not to be denied. 
Heaven be thanked for it ; and may Heaven forgive the poor 
use men made of it ! Oh ! had the right stamp been present 
for making the right impression upon the molten metal ! Had 
but the religion of Christ and reason — ^the religion which, in a 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 41 

land of Slavery and dram-sliops calls on its new-born disciples 
to make their first demonstration against those greatest enemies 
of God and man — had but that religion been offered to the 
tens of thousands of hearts that were then open to receive it — 
what an array of practical Christians would have been the 
fruit of the revival ! But alas ! instead of this priceless bless- 
ing, the revival was perverted to the propagation of that worth- 
less doctrinal or conventional religion which keeps on good 
terms with Slavery, and flourishes among the dram-shops ! 

The city of New- York was the great centre of the revival. 
But when I was there, two or three weeks ago, I heard that the 
use of tobacco and strong drink was increasing rapidly ; and 
several times I saw what I never see without sickness of soul, 
deep shame and sorrow and disgust, city cars labeled : " Colored 
peo|)le allowed in this car." What an insult to our equal 
brethren ! What an insult to our common Father ! What a 
blasphemous denial of His right to color as He will the varieties 
of the human family ! 

Now, these abominations exist in that city, because her re- 
vived, augmented, multiplied churches acquiesce in them. 
Every one knows, that were her pulpits and pews to speak, and 
vote as they should, all her cars would be opened as readily to 
people of one complexion as another. Every one knows that 
the dram-shops of New- York could not withstand the combined 
testimony of her churches. But her churches are not churches 
of Jesus Christ any further than they are actively against her 
dram-shops and her outrages upon the colored man. 

Peterboro, as you remember, shared in last year's revival. 
But, is she the better for it ? Has she less sectarianism ? Much 
more. Has she proved herself more true to temperance and 
freedom ? Much less. Have even her pastors, who were so 
active in the revival, shown their own profiting by it ? Of only 
one of them can I speak. I well remember how earnestly at 
former elections he called on the people to vote the abolition 
and temperance ticket; but I am told that he was never known 
to open his lips for it at the last election. It was a sad change 
in my old friend and pastor. Was it the revival or something- 
else that wrought it ? True, he is of late much taken up with 
the doctrines of religion. But does he hold that he is, tliere- 
fore, excused from its practice ? True, he is of late very busy 



42 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

in dealing damnation among those who dissent from his inter- 
pretation of these doctrines. But is the merit of this work so 
great as to atone for the neglect at the ballot-box of the bleed- 
ing slave and the bleeding cause of temperance ? Oh ! when 
will these doctrinal religionists learn that the promise of heaven 
is to him that '' worketh righteousness ?" — that " he that doetli 
righteousness is righteous," and that " whosoever doeth not 
righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his 
brother." 

Finally, we are charged with being infidels. Kow, although 
I would advise that this and all other false charges against us 
be borne with good temper, I am, nevertheless, of the opinion 
that we should quit the defensive, and pursue our assailants. 
When they charge ns with being infidels because of our defec- 
tive creeds, let us charge them with being infidels because of their 
wicked deeds. And this we are to do, not in the spirit of revenge, 
but for the purpose of putting them upon juster thoughts of 
themselves, and, as may perhaps follow, upon a needed condem- 
nation of themselves. A very large majority of those who have 
the impudence to bring this charge against us prove themselves 
atheists by their treatment of their fellow-men. All persons 
are atheists who do not honor Grod by honoring his children. 
Hence, all are atheists who refuse to eat with their colored breth- 
ren, or to sit by their side in the carriage or the pew. And if there 
are Christians that vote for men who recognize the legality of 
Slavery, and wield the power of their office to perpetuate the 
bondage of the slave, none the less atheistic is such voting. And 
so, too, voting for those who recognize the sacred rights of pro- 
perty in intoxicating liquors, when offered for sale as a beverage, 
and who are in favor of keeping up the dram-shop, is none the 
less atheistic, because there are Christians who are guilty of it. 

But I must bring my too long discoui'se to a close. This is 
an unsaved world. Superstitions have been employed to save 
it, and of course unsuccessfully. A misinterpreted and corrup- 
ted Christianity has been found inadequate. It will remain 
an unsaved world until trial shall be made of the true Christ- 
ianity — of that religion of nature and reason which tests men not 
by their doctrines, but " by their fruits," and which makes it the 
one great work of every person to elevate himself and all within 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 43 

his reach to the very highest resemblances of God that humanity 
is capable of attaining. 

Shall we, my neighbors, have a part in bringing the world un- 
der the power of this only saving religion ? Let us remember 
that we can not have it, unless we bring ourselves under its pow- 
er. We can not be instrumental in spreading abroad this only 
true religion unless we have made it the treasure of our own 
hearts and the attraction and glory of our own lives. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

A DISCOURSE BY GERRIT SMITH. 

IN PETERBORO, JUNE 19TH, 1859. 



What is the true religion ? No other question propounded 
to mortals is so important. Answered, however, it easily can 
be, if only the true Grod is known. For, wherever He is known, 
there also is the true religion known. The religion of a people 
necessarily adjusts itself to their apprehensions of God. Know 
they the true God? — then is theirs the true religion. But spu- 
rious is it if they know him not. Hence the question to the so- 
lution of which we address ourselves is. What is the true" God? 

That in knowledge and power God is infinite may be assumed. 
But what is his moral charcter ? Is He just, reasonable, benig- 
nant, loving, beneficent? Or, is He unjust, arbitrary, capri- 
cious, malignant, injurious ? To compress the question into the 
fewest words. Is it in good or evil that He delights ? 

In order to obtain a surely right answer to this question, we 
must study not the opinions which are formed of God, but God 
himself. We must look not at what others tell us of His works, 
but at the works themselves. We must go not to men's records 
of Him, but to his own : not to books written by men, but to 
books written by God — to such books as the sun and stars and 
earth. For not only is it true that God can be " understood by 
the things that are made," but it is also true that by no other 
means can He be understood. Only in this vast creation which 
we call Nature, can we find the certain evidences of God's 
nature. 

Man is a part of this vast creation : and in the light of him- 
self and of other parts of it, and of his relation to them, he has 
abundant proof that God delights in good. The sun, which 



THE KELIGION OF REASON. 45 

lights and warms him, and the fruitful earth, which feeds and 
clothes him, are proofs of it. The returning seasons not only 
prove there is a God, but that He is a loving father. So full of 
His goodness are they that one of the poets calls them God. 
Though not a Pantheist, I nevertheless can forgive the Panthe- 
istic personification into which this sweet poet is carried when 
he says of the seasons : 

"These as they change, Almighty Father, these 
Are but the varied God. The rolling year 
Is full of Thee." 

I referred to the constitution of man for proof of the Divine 
goodness. How happy is he in obeying and how miserable in 
violating the laws of his own being! Should he not, then, 
allow himself to be convinced by these laws that his Maker is 
his friend and father ? — the designer of good and not evil ? — 
and that " Love" is among the fittest of all the names given to 
him? 

And what is there throughout the realms of physical and 
moral government to raise so much as one doubt of the Divine 
attributes ? In connecting peace with righteousness, and in or- 
daining the outflow of happiness from virtue, and misery from 
vice, has He not shown that love of the right and the pure, that 
benevolence and goodness are elements in His character ? But 
death is in the world, is the reply ; and such an evil and such 
a curse is it in the esteem of the theologians that they insist we 
need to go outside of nature and to other revelations for proof 
that God governs in justice and love. It is not true, however, 
that death is a curse ; nor that it is so much as a calamity. 
That it is a penalty is purely a theological fiction. Were the 
laws of life and health properly observed, the common age of 
man reaching probably to a hundred years, would give ample 
tiDie for making trial and reaping the enjoyments of this state 
of being. He would then feel death to be seasonable. Abund- 
antly welcome would it be if he had observed the moral laws 
also — it being in his power to learn these as well as the physical, 
by studying the creation and providence of God. Abundantly 
welcome, I say — for then his holy, happy life would aftbrd him 
the conscious preparation for a succeeding stage of existence. 
I add that death is necessary to make room for countless mil- 
lions of human beings who otherwise could have no existence ; 



46 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

and that thus it is to be credited with swelling indefinitely the 
sum total of human happiness. Again, while a perpetual earth- 
ly existence would be the foregoing of another and probably 
higher life, it would also be characterized by far less enjoyment, 
dignity, and usefulness, than is a limited earthly existence. 
Human nature is slow to be improved after its habits are 
formed and fixed. The commonest illustration of this is that 
the physicians over forty years of age rejected the discovery of 
the true theory of the circulation of the blood. Had the earth, 
instead of being peopled with a succession of young, and, be- 
cause young, free spirits, been the abode of men who never die, 
hoary errors would have successfully conspired against all pro- 
gress, had there, indeed, been any to conspire against. Of all 
the inventions which cluster upon our day, probably not one 
would have been known in the whole range, from the lucifer- 
match which supplies the place of carrying fire in a skillet, to 
the telegraph which does in a minute what live-forever men 
could hardly have hegun in a month. Indeed, death seems to 
be as indispensable a provision of nature for improving the con- 
dition and character of man, as it does to prepare the way for 
new and improved races of animals. Why is it unreasonable 
to believe that the races of men millions of years hence will 
surpass what they are now, quite as much as the most finely or- 
ganized and the most beautiful specimens of animals in this age 
of the earth surpass the trilobites and other fauna of the Silurian 
period ? Surely while we see death to be so great a blessing, 
we are not to argue from it that God is not good ; but we are 
rather to exalt ourselves to such a comprehension of it, that we 
shall see it to be among the most needed provisions for man, 
and therefore among the highest evidences of the Divine good- 
ness. Is it said that great changes in the earth rendered it an 
impossible abode for those races of animals which have disap- 
peared ? Let us not forget that probably as great changes are 
still going on, and that probably they are continually calling 
for and continually contributing to corresponding changes in 
man as well as in animals. 

It is a sound rule in logic to begin with the known and pro- 
ceed to the unknown ; to begin with what is self-evident and 
proceed to what requires proof. As such was my beginning, so 
I am now at liberty to advance to a proposition which requires 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 47 

a little defense. It is perlicaps, however, only a little explana- 
tion that it requires. The proposition is that nature teaches 
there is a strong resemblance between God and man. They arc 
''workers together." The grand Creator-worker and the little 
creature- worker are suited to each other. Man supplies what 
is lacking at the hand of God. He takes up nature from lier 
Author, and develo]3S her into new forms of embellishment, 
and results of higher usefulness. The work of each in the de- 
partment of flowers shows that each has a taste for beauty and 
ornament. The work of each in the department of food for 
man and beast shows that each is provident and beneficent. 
The part that each has in feeding the hungry, and clothing the 
naked, proves that both are pitiful and benevolent. The moun- 
tain which the one and the pyramid which the other builds 
prove that both enjoy the sublime, and that both work for the 
ages. 

We have said enough to justify our inferring of the moral 
nature of God from that of man. We deduce the former from 
our knowledge of the latter. We know that man's moral na- 
ture is good, and therefore that God's is. Man is loving and 
merciful, and appreciates truth and equity. Goodness is natural 
to him. In the narration of Paul's shipwrecked company of 
two hundred and seventy-six persons it is said : " And the bar- 
barous people showed us no little kindness : for they kindled a 
fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain and 
because of the cold." It is true that this people might have 
murdered every one. But they would have done it under some 
misapprehension springing up in their barbarous ignorance, and 
contrary to that underlying humanity which called on them to 
save and comfort every one of their helpless guests. 

The most barbarous people on earth, could they hear the 
story of the Good Samaritan, would honor him and condemn 
the Priest and Levite. Even such a people would applaud the 
golden rule, and would also acknowledge truth to be right and 
lying to be wrong. I do not forget that such crimes as burning 
the widow and casting the infant into the river are often cited 
to prove that human nature is blind, and bad, and base. These, 
however, are crimes not of, but against, human nature. They 
express its perversions, not itself The religions of the world 
are mainly responsible for this class of crimes. It is these re- 



48 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

ligions that have in all lands and ages outraged human nature, 
ignored it, and created monsters to take its place and wear its 
name. Most of the great crimes (Slavery included) which have 
disgraced and crushed mankind, have been committed either 
avowedly in the name of religion, or directly or indirectly un- 
der its promptings ; and scarcely ever without the plea of its 
sanction. 

Let, then, the theologians continue to insist on the badness, 
baseness, and blindness of human nature ; we nevertheless will 
continue to repose faith in its moral perceptions and in its dis- 
cernment and appreciation of truth, justice, and mercy. We 
nevertheless will continue to draw from his resemblances to 
man some of our strongest arguments for attributing a just, for- 
giving, and loving spirit to God. 

Most persons will recoil from the inference of God's goodness 
from man's. Their eye is on the masses of men. But the 
masses are only the ruins of men — though even in these ruins, 
noble and beautiful characteristics of human nature can still be 
discovered. Human nature can not be so successfully judged of 
in the light of those who trample upon as of those who obey its 
laws. We should judge of it by good men. Nay, we should 
come at once to Jesus, and judge of it by him : for he is its best 
specimen, since he was perfectly obedient to all the laws of his 
being. When we say that the Divine nature is like human na- 
ture, we do indeed mean that God resembles even the common 
and unfavorable specimens of man, though of course much less 
than He does the best. But when Jesus, the model man, is in 
our eye, then do we say with an emphasis that God is like man. 

Another argument to sustain the conclusion that God is like 
man is, that it can not, without the greatest violence to all prob- 
ability, be supposed that He would create His intelligent be- 
ings with a moral nature contrary to His own. Were His na- 
ture malignant so would be theirs. But we see them to be on 
the side of justice and goodness, and so therefore is He. 

Now, if human nature, wherever its voice can be heard be- 
neath the immeasurable wrongs and outrages which are every 
where heaped upon it, and are every where at work to suppress 
that voice, does still, in spite of those wrongs and outrages, 
witness for truth and justice and love and mercy, then surely 
these qualities must all be found in the Author of human na- 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 49 

ture. Moreover, they must be perfect in Him, in order to cor- 
respond with the perfect wisdom, skill, and contrivance mani- 
fested in His works. The attributes of Deity, if bad, must be 
entirely bad ; if good, entirely good. 

When, then, we are told that God could not forgive sin until 
His angry spirit had been appeased and His laws satisfied by 
the sufferings of an innocent person, we reply that this view of 
Him and of His spirit and laws is forbidden, not only by what 
we learn of Him and them directly from His outward and visi- 
ble creations, but also from those clearly warrantable inferences 
of His moral nature which we draw from that of man. His 
character, as viewed from these indubitable sources, assures us 
that He is ever ready to forgive every repentant offender. Je- 
sus was assured of it, else he would not have taught it in the 
parable of the prodigal son. But Jesus goes much further. 
His words on the cross imply a belief that his Father is ready 
to forgive the impenitent also, provided that ignorance be cou- 
pled with their impenitence. But even men are good enough 
to do all this. Much more then is God. " If ye, then, being 
evil, know how to give good gifts, how much more your Fa- 
ther?" 

But it is said that nature and the history of man abound in an- 
alogies to the Atonement. I can not admit that any such analo- 
gies are to be found in either. It is true that ofttimes the guilt" 
less suffer for the guilty — now of necessity, and now of choice. 
But in no case is there a transference of character frc)m one to 
the other. The guilty party remains no less guilty, and the 
guiltless party contracts no guilt literal or constructive. Ke- 
member, too, that the human sense of justice revolts at visiting 
upon the good man the penalty due to the bad man — a strong- 
argument, by the way, that the Divine sense does also. 

When, too, we are told that God has prepared an eternal hell 
— a place of endless and inconceivably exquisite tortures — for a 
large share of his children, we are sure that this shocking pic- 
ture finds no counterpart and no warrant in creation and Prov- 
idence. These tell us of a father and not of a fiend ; of love, 
and not of hatred ; of forgiveness, and not of revenge. These 
tell us that in all ages God has made " his sun to rise on the 
evil and on the good," and has sent his " rain on the just and 
on the unjust ;" and these bid us hope that in other worlds, as 
4 



60 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

well as in this, He will still be the father and the friend of men. 
Again, if men are miserable here, it is not of Ilis infliction, but 
because they make themselves so ; yes, and make themselves 
so in the midst of the numberless and sufficient means He has 
provided for making themselves happy. If, in this world, men 
persevere in ruining themselves, it is in the face of His perse- 
verance to save them. And why should it be otherwise in 
other worlds ? From nothing we see of God is He changeable. 
"We are bound to believe that He is as ready to afford His chil- 
dren opportunities in one stage of being as well as in another, 
for the improvement of their character ; and that He is ever in- 
tent, as much so in one world as in another, to do them good 
and not evil. And why should we doubt that God is as 
forgiving in another life as in this ? Would Jesus have told 
us to set no limits to the times of forgiving our brother, had he 
believed that the exercise of God's forgiving spirit is confined 
to this first brief stage of human existence ? Would he have 
told us to be so much better than he believed God to be ? 

Eternal hell I Then must sin be an eternally -disturbing force 
in the universe. For manifestly when sin shall have ceased, 
punishment will also. 

Eternal hell ! Yes, and it is to be suffered by men of the 
loveliest character, provided they were not able to subscribe in 
this life to certain ecclesiastical interpretations of a book. 

Putting people into an eternal hell ! Why, the worst of men 
would not thus serve their worst enemies. How much less 
would God ! Orthodoxy makes God infinitely more malignant 
and cruel than are the most malignant and cruel men. 

Eternal hell ! Ko man does and no man can believe it. It 
is untrue if only because human nature is incapable of believing 
it. Moreover, were such a belief possible it would be fatal. 
Let the American people wake up with it to-morrow, and none 
of them would go to their fields, and none to their shops, and none 
would care for their homes. All interest in the things of earth 
would be dead. The whole nation would be struck with pa- 
ralysis, and frozen with horror. Even the beginnings of such a 
belief are too much for the safety of the brain ; and every step 
in that direction is a step toward the madhouse. The orthodox 
preacher of an eternal hell would himself go crazy did he be- 
lieve his own preaching. Did he see his wife, or children, or 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 51 

friends, or neighbors, in danger of falling into it, he would be 
overpowered by the sight, lie saves his sanity only through 
his insincerity. To be sincere in his preaching he must first be 
insane. 

The little influence of their religion on its professors is often 
wondered at. But why should it be? They do not believe 
their religion, and they can not, so long as an eternal hell is a 
part of it. Since their belief of this part is at the most but a 
dreamy and fancied one, there can hardly be a real, earnest and 
deeply-influential belief of any part. Their conscious or uncon- 
scious distrust of the truth of this part necessarily begets a sim- 
ilar distrust of the truth of every part. The enormous draught 
at this point upon their staggering faith can not fail to cast in 
their view an air of unreality over the whole of their religion. 
Herein is the explanation of the fact that, while an ignorant 
church is little better than a mass of superstition, a more en- 
lightened one is little better than a mass of infidelity and hy- 
pocrisy. The members of the latter, required to believe in 
more than their credulity can swallow, do truly and deeply be- 
lieve in nothing ; and thus are they infidels. Moreover, they 
are very great hypocrites, since they stoutly profess to believe 
it all. Doubtless, one of their motives for this boundless pro- 
fession of faith is to supply their conscious lack of it. They 
are something like Mrs. Stowe's Candace, who, to atone for her 
past lack of faith in the celebrated Bible apple, was now ready 
to eat apple, tree, and all. 

We are wont to lament the prevailing want of religious ear- 
nestness. But should we not rather rejoice in it, seeing how 
monstrous are the religions ? With what a good stomach we 
should hate, and crush, and kill one another, if we really be- 
lieved that we are such devils as our religions picture us to be I 
Once persuade me that God is waiting to roast my neighbor, 
and the way is made easier for persuading me that I shall do 
God service by hurrying that neighbor with a dagger or bullet 
into the prepared fire. 

But it is held that these things, which are so at war with Na- 
ture and Providence, are affirmed by the Bible. I do not admit 
that they are. Certainly they are not by the Bible as a whole. 
But even if they were, that would, not prove them to be true. 
It would only prove that, so far, the Bible is false. Whether 



62 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

these things are true or failse, is a question to be referred not to 
the umpirage of a book, but to the infinitely higher one of Na- 
ture and Providence. 

But is not the Bible the word of God? It is no further such 
than it corresponds with the manifestations of God. It is to be 
judged by Nature and Providence. Formerly, men in their 
folly made the Bible paramount to Nature and Providence, as 
even now does the splendid Baptist writer of New- York who 
calls geology and astronomy "inferior truth." They went to 
it to study the motions of the heavenly bodies. But wise men 
went to astronomy. Even in our own day there are persons 
who go to the Bible for an understanding of earthly creations ; 
and even dear Hugh Miller himself thoiight it very important 
to save it from the reproach of ignorance in this respect. Wise 
men, however, go to geology, caring nothing at all of the havoc 
it may make of the traditions and allegories of Genesis. Folly, 
sheer folly, seeks to mould the mountains, and deposit the rocks 
and account for the waters in harmony with those traditions 
and allegories. But wisdom lets the mountains, rocks and wa- 
ters, speak for themselves, let what will gainsay them. So, too, 
it is held that the Bible, and the Bible alone, explains the 
moral government of the world. Most religionists, very fool- 
ishly turning their backs upon the sure light that Creation and 
Providence shed upon this subject, as foolishly acknowledge 
the words of a book to be conclusive upon it. Alas ! that men 
should fancy that they do in this wise honor the revealed God ! 
They deeply dishonor Him. For the revelations of a book, to 
which they confine themselves, are as small as they are uncer- 
tain, compared with "the abundance of the revelations" in na- 
ture. 

But is not the Bible inspired ? The spirit of much of it 
comes, I admit, from the heavenly fount. Very common earth- 
ly sources, however, would be adequate to supply most of the 
remainder. No other pages are so full of the Divine presence 
and power as are a part of its pages. But there are pages of 
the Bible which might have been written by entire strangers to 
that presence and power. 

Is not, however, the Bible infallible ? No person but God is 
infallible ; and no thing but nature. Nature is the infallible 
witness for the infallible God. Precious source of enlighten- 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 53 

ment is the Bible. But in the light of nature only, (I need not 
add providence, since that is a part of or essentially connected 
with nature,) can the true religion be surely learned. The 
Bible is the work of man, and hence even its best pages must 
bear the marks of human imperfection. But the volume of 
nature is written by the finger of God, and is, therefore, as free 
from error as Himself. What, however, is the Bible, or rather 
a Bible, that we are bound to adopt the whole of it unquestion- 
ingly, and to worship it, and to insist that there is not in the 
whole of it one unsound doctrine, nor one false sentiment ? I 
wish all the clergy would tell their hearers that it is simply a 
selection from ancient writings — a selection, too, made by per- 
sons who no one claims were inspired. Such outspoken honesty 
would serve to overthrow a great deal of superstition, and to 
dispel a great deal of delusion. Millions, on hearing this news, 
would look upon the Bible with new eyes. Then, for the first 
time, they would have courage to exercise (but oh ! with what 
trembling !) their reason upon it, and to judge of its merits for 
themselves. Then, for the first time, the soul-darkening, soul- 
shriveling, and soul-enslaving religion of authority, would be- 
gin to give place in them to the soul-enlightening, soul-expand- 
ing, and soul-freeing religion of reason. 

The clergy should also frankly tell their hearers that they who 
undertook to make up a Bible differed widely among them- 
selves in respect to what should go to make it up. They should 
tell them how some voted to receive and others to reject this, 
that, and the other of these ancient writings. Kor should they 
forget to add, that the Catholics hold that the Protestant Bible 
does not take in near as many of those ancient writings as it 
should ; and that the Protestants hold that the Catholic Bible 
takes in far more than it should. 

Perhaps both the Catholic and Protestant Bibles take in too 
many of these writings : perhaps too few. Were I to make up 
a Bible for myself, it might differ much from both. It might 
be inferior, possibly it might be superior to both. But, how- 
ever this may be, my assumption of the right to force it upon 
the conscience of others would be no more arrogant and non- 
sensical than is the like assumption in behalf of the existing 
Bibles. Every man is in an important sense bound to make up 
a Bible for himself. But while this is required by the religion 



54 THE KELIGION OF REASON. 

of reason, the religion of authority claims that its patent right 
from heaven to make Bibles excludes every other right to make 
them. 

I refused to admit that the Bible, especially as a whole, jus- 
tifies the popular or orthodox view, either of the Atonement 
or of future punishment. An eternal hell finds no countenance 
in the Old Testament, and is opposed to the general tenor of the 
New. There are a few words in the latter which favor the in- 
stitution. I say institution — for if Slavery may be dignified 
with this name, it is peculiarly proper that every other hell 
should be. Such of these few words as are attributed to Jesus 
(and most of them are) would be entitled to our most profound 
and earnest consideration, could we be sure that he uttered 
them. But even if we could be, we should be more or less un- 
certain to what they refer. Moreover, as they are used in con- 
nection with his highly figurative and surpassingly hyperbolical 
language, we should be apprehensive that to put a literal inter- 
pretation upon them might be to sacrifice their significance. 
Manifestly, then, these few words constitute a basis quite too 
narrow and uncertain on which to build an argument for an 
eternal hell — an argument leading to the most important and 
appalling of all conclusions. 

In every age, thousands of the learned spend no little time 
in concentrating the whole power of their minds, and the whole 
interest of their hearts, upon inquiries into the meaning of an 
adjective which Jesus is reported to have coupled with the word 
" punishment." Upon that meaning they make turn the future 
and eternal condition of man. AYhat matchless folly to go to 
an adjective, instead of God, with a question of such overwhelm- 
ing importance ! Nay, what insanity to be thus driving an ex- 
clusive search into a word, for the purpose of learning the very 
little of the Divine will which can be learned from a mere word, 
while all the while the heavens above our heads, and the earth 
beneath our feet, are teeming with unmistakable and conclusive 
evidences of that will ! Oh ! when will men " turn from these 
vanities unto the living God, who made heaven and earth and 
the sea, and all things that are therein ; and left not himself 
without witness in that He did good, and gave us rain from 
heaven, and fruitfal seasons, filling our hearts with food and 
gladness !" 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 65 

To return for a moment to this unduly-magnified adjective. 
Is it properly translated into " everlasting ?" That is uncertain. 
Uncertain, too, is it whether it was spoken in Hebrew, Syriae, 
or Greek. For scholars can no more decide in what language 
it was spoken than in what language the Book of Matthew was 
first written. Now, if the idea whicli Jesus conveyed in this 
word, and in its original connections, has indeed gone the round 
of all these languages, then it would not be strange if, by the 
time it reached our language, it had become a greatly changed 
idea. 

Nor can it be properly said that the popular or orthodox 
view of the Atonement is sustained by the Bible. The few 
passages for it are inconsistent with the general tenor of the 
book. 

The Jews were waiting for the Messiah. He came. The 
mass did not own bim ; and the few who did were sadly disap- 
pointed and utterly confounded by his death. They '' thought 
it had been he who should have restored Israel." But in pro- 
cess of time happy turns were given to his death, whereby the 
believing Jews were lifted up out of the despair into which that 
death had sunk them. One of these turns, as honest, I admit, 
as it was natural, was the Atonement. The sacrifice of animals 
for the remission of sins was deeply rooted in the Jewish fiiith. 
A very easy step, therefore, was it to a fanciful analogy between 
such sacrifice and the death of Christ, and still easier was the 
succeeding step which transmuted the fiction into an indubit- 
able fact. The early Gentile converts were probably but little 
interested in the Atonement. Not being prepared for it by a 
Jewish education, they would be slow to receive it. To them 
Paul says very little of it. The sacrifices of the Greeks and 
Eomans differed widely from those of the Jews. 

I admit that the Atonement is, in the esteem of the majority 
of Christians, the great central doctrine of Christianity — the 
great saving doctrine, inasmuch as they hold that every man 
denying it must perish, and that Christianity itself would perish 
without it. But if the faith of the earliest Christians is appeal- 
ed to for determining its relative importance, then will but little 
account be made of the doctrine. Jesus did not teach it, nor 
was it taught until many years after his death. It would not 
be held to at this day, had not Paul taught it. Paul would not 



56 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

have taught it, had he not been a Jew. The Jews would not 
liave received it but for their faith in animal sacrifices ; and 
from this faith they would have been free, had they entirely 
outgrown paganism. It was because of their pagan conceptions 
of Deity that they numbered damnation and destruction among 
His intensest delights. It was because of the linge rings of pa- 
ganism in them, that they attributed to Him a burning wrath 
which blood and suffering could alone appease. 

No, the Atonement was not the preeminent doctrine with the 
early Christians. The Eesurrection held that place. This was 
the "hope" for which Paul was judged — the "hope that there 
shall be a resurrection of the dead." He taught that their 
preaching and faith were vain if there be no resurrection. 

I have mentioned one of the happy turns given to the death 
of Christ. Another and no less honest one was that which 
made his death lead to a triumphant argument for the resurrec- 
tion. If Christ had risen, then there would be a rising of all, 
" both of the just and the unjust." His resurrection was 
held to be the earnest — the " first fruits" of the general resur- 
rection. 

With the believing Jews, the Messiah's reign — a visible and 
literal reign — was second in importance to the resurrection only. 
They were sure of it. So, too, was Jesus. The difference be- 
tween himself and them on this point was, that they believed 
he would set up his kingdom then, and he that he must first 
pass through the gates of death. Soon after his death, how- 
ever, they believed that he had risen, and the effect of this be- 
lief was to renew their confidence in his kingdom. Confident 
were they that he would soon return to "reign in righteous- 
ness." Full of this confidence was Paul. He doubted not that 
"the end of the world has come ;" though he did not think it 
to be quite as near as the Thessalonians did. Peter doubted 
not that "the end of all things is at hand." So, too, James, 
" that the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." And John adds : 
" We know it is the last time." But Christ did himself assign 
a very early date to his return. Matt. 16 : 28 ; 24 : 34; Mark 
9:1; Luke 21 : 32. 

It surely should not be allowed to deduct any thing from our 
estimate of the value of Christ, nor from our love of him and 
interest in him, that in this and that instance the Father has 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 57 

disclosed the *' day and hour not to the angels which are in 
heaven, neither the Son." I know how common is the remark 
that Christ can not be loved by those, and can be of no avail to 
those, who do not see him to be at all points one with his Fa- 
ther. But the remark is as foolish as it is common. That he 
is one with his Father in spirit and character makes him all we 
need of him ; and it should produce in us no sorrowful disap- 
pointment and no sense of loss to know that in the end "shall 
the Son also himself be subject unto Him, that God may be all 
in all." Alas ! that men should waste their time and zeal upon 
these speculative and profitless questions about Christ. To 
every one thus unwisely employed does he say as he did to the 
impertinent Peter: "What is that to thee? follow thou me." 
Suppose Christ did misapprehend some or even many of the 
things in the future. No less bound are we to follow him, and 
grow in likeness to him. No less is he God's own spirit "man- 
ifest in the flesh." No less is he our teacher, pattern. Saviour. 

Yes, Jesus believed not only that the Jewish nation would 
within a few years be overwhelmed and scattered, but that 
" then" would his kingdom be set up, and " with power and 
great glory. The temple, Jerusalem, and Judea, did all meet 
their fate before the generation to which Jesus spoke had pass- 
ed away. But his kingdom has not yet been set up, nor have 
the signs appeared which were to precede it. 

By the way, is not the scene described in Matt. 25 : 31 to 
46, substantially identical with that described in Matt. 24 
and Luke 21, and therefore was it not to be enacted within a 
few years from the day in which Christ pictured it before his 
hearers ? In other words, is that scene, instead of being, as is 
held, the final judgment of all the living and dead, any thing 
more than a merely Jewish scene ? In Matt. 24 and Luke 
21, we have the foretelling of the ruin of the Jewish nation 
and the setting up of the Messiah's kingdom. In Matt. 25, 
are we not informed of the reward of those Jews who welcom- 
ed the ministry of Christ, and of the punishment of those Jews 
who rejected it — especially of the reward of those who, during 
his expected brief disappearance from earth, should honor his 
disciples — even "the least" of them — and the punishment of 
those who, during that brief period, should neglect those dis- 
ciples — even "the least" of them ? It is true that the word is 



68 THE EELIGION OF BEASOX. 

translated '' nations," but it is also true that " nations" is not 
among its primary meanings, and that "multitudes," "compa- 
nies," " tribes" are. In the light of Matt. 19 : 28, do we not see 
some evidence that " tribes" would be a proper translation, and 
that the judgment in view was not to be of "all nations," but 
only of all the Jewish tribes ? 

I readily admit that this passage in Matt. 25 would nor, 
if standing alone, easily bear this unusual interpretation. But 
must it not be looked at in connection with Matt. 16, and Mark 
9, and Luke 21, etc., and interpreted in the light of these Scrip- 
tures as well as in the light of its own language ? Moreover, 
we must remember both how exceedingly figurative is the lan- 
guage in Matt. 25, and how improbable it is that it is reported 
with entire correctness. I confess that owing to the fact that a 
simultaneous judgment of all the living and all the dead is a 
puzzle to common-sense, I am liable to give force to what are 
but feeble and, indeed, but seeming objections to the common 
interpretation of the scene in Matt. 25. 

But however this sublime scene should be interpreted, our 
duty to identify ourselves with the cause of Christ, and to walk 
in his steps, remains the same. Admit we must that every ex- 
planation of it is beset with difficulties. Nevertheless, we repeat 
that Jesus remains the same model of moral character by which 
every one is bound to fashion his own, and the same personifica- 
tion of love and holiness which every one should aspire to 
become. 

Far from inexplicable is it that so many stickle for the 
divinity and atonement of Christ and other metaphysical doc- 
trines coupled with His name, while so few are found who are 
intent on breathing His spirit and copying His life. Self- 
complacent logic suflices for the former ; but to accomplish the 
latter there must be the self-denying and cross-bearing cultiva- 
tion of character. The bare profession of Christ meets the 
whole demand in the one case. But character — even the 
character of Christ — ^is called for at every step in the other. In 
the light of this distinction, we see how it is that, while Christ- 
ians are so very scarce, sectarians are so very plenty. Difficult 
it is to follow Christ ; but easy to be swayed by a party zeal for 
this or that denomination. Difficult it is to perform duties ; but 
easy to prate about doctrines. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 59 

I am reminded in this connection of the denial of Christian 
character to all who disbelieve or doubt any of the miracles in 
the history of Christ. But the denial is as unjust as it is com- 
7non, since it turns not at all upon, and does not at all involve, 
our moral character whether we do or do not give credit to 
miracles. Men may be either good or bad, and give such credit ; 
either good or bad, and withhold it. A scholar in this day, 
however devout, would be very like to withhold it ; for, aware 
as he is that all nations abound in traditions of miracles, and 
agreeing with the intelligent that all others are false, he quite 
naturally calls in question the truth of the Christian miracles 
also. He doubts even the miraculous conception of Jesus. For 
in his extensive reading he has found the instances very com- 
mon all along down the track of the world's history, in which 
a supernatural origin is attributed to its heroes and philosophers. 
It would not be strange if, remembering that Plato was believed 
to be the offspring of a god and a virgin, and if, remembering, 
too, that it was also believed that the man who subsequently 
became her husband was told, in a dream, by the god not to 
marry her until her divine child was born — I say, it would not 
be strange if he should suspect that the account of the origin 
of Jesus is but a substantial repetition of this fable about Plato. 
The scholar might be all wrong in this suspicion. Nevertheless, 
he would not necessarily be a sinner for it. 

To be frank, I suppose that all enlightened and broad-minded 
men do at least doubt the truth of miracles. They have never 
seen any, and hence they are slow to yield to even abounding 
testimony in their behalf. Had they ever seen so much as one 
miracle, they could easily be brought to believe in others, on 
the same principle that, having seen one city, men can be per- 
suaded of the existence of others. Moreover, it is especially 
difficult for him to believe in the Christian miracles who reflects 
that Christianity has done more than all things else to dispel 
belief in miracles. He would naturally expect that a religion 
of such an effect would keep itself clear of miracles. By the 
way, this effect of Christianity is among the arguments for 
regarding it as a natural rather than a supernatural religion. 

I was speaking of Christ's misapprehensions of the future, 
when I was drawn off upon an incidental subject. May I not 
add to what I said of these naisapprehensions, that He became, 



f)0 THE KELIGION OF REASON. 

on His ascension, immeasurably more than perhaps He himself 
expected to be ? He lived and died the Messiah of the Jews ; 
and not only did He believe, in common with His disciples, 
that He would return to earth, but it is somewhat probable that 
He also believed that He would return to earth in no wider 
capacity than that in which He left it. Unbounded and ever- 
lasting thanks to God, His Messiahship and nationality fell off 
at the grave, and He arose the Saviour of Mankind ! His life, 
and death, and words, and spirit, are not the monopoly of one 
nation, but the common property of all. They are not for the 
salvation and glory of the Jew only, but of all, whether Jew 
or Gentile, who are willing to be saved and glorified by them. 

It is time, however, we had returned from this long digression, 
in which, while we have vindicated the Bible, we have, never- 
theless, admitted that nature is the only authoritative instructor 
in our study of the character of God. Before making this 
disgression, we had said enough to prove what, in the light of 
this instructor, is that character. "We saw God to be just and 
good; and hence it is entirely plain to reason that justice and 
goodness are the spirit of the true religion. For, as was said in 
the beginning of our discourse, the true religion must be like the 
true God. Another thing no less plain to reason is, that if the 
religion in our hearts is the true one, it will be found to recog- 
nize and honor and harmonize with the several kinds of intel- 
ligent beings with which it has to do. While toward God and 
men and angels (provided it has to do with angels also) it is always 
the same spirit of justice and goodness, it nevertheless adapts 
itself to the different demands of the three different natures. 

The Psalmist says : " My goodness extendeth not to Thee." 
There is a sense in which this is emphatically true. Neverthe- 
less the love, gratitude, adoration, prayer due to God are ex- 
pressions of the goodness as well as of the justice which enter 
into the spirit of the true religion. In other words, there are 
services of religion which are Godward — being called out by 
his nature, and adapted to it. 

Excuse me for making another disgression. Just here I must 
defend prayer — the duty of the exercise being strongly doubted 
in some quarters, and even totally denied in others. It is ap- 
prehended by some, and fully believed by others, that prayer 
overlooks and interferes with the general laws of the universe. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON-. 61 

Men must have become persuaded of the truth of the doctrine 
of Divine influence before they will become men of prayer. 
The influence of a great and good man pervades his town, his 
county, and, may be, his whole State. Why, then, may not 
God's influence pervade His universe ? But skepticism knows 
the means by which man's influence is dijffused, and not those by 
which God's is. And shall it, therefore, deny that those exist, 
and deny, too, that the influence itself exists ? 

The doctrine of Divine influence admitted, and there are 
prayers which all will see to be reasonable ; such as are in effect 
prayers for the opening of the mind to that influence. Do I 
pray for an increase of my physical or spiritual health ? If I 
pray intelligently, it is not that God may increase it, but that 
He may influence me to increase it by my improvement of the 
means to that end placed by His providence within my reach. 
In other words, it is asking Him to dispose me to answer my 
own prayers ; and surely this is not ignoring any general laws 
with which we are acquainted ; nor is it asking Him to come 
into conflict with them. 

Widely different, I admit, would be the case were I praying 
for sunshine or rain. That would be praying that a work may 
be done not by myself but by God — and a work involving, it 
might be, an arrest of some of His general laws. Nevertheless, 
I do not say that there are no possible circumstances in which a 
people are to feel at liberty to pray for what involves such 
arrest. When threatened with famine by drouth or rain, or 
with some other great calamity, they, perhaps, ought so to pray, 
and not to confine themselves to prayer for resignation. For 
we do not know but, in so praying, they would keep themselves 
in harmony with a law as old and fixed and eternal as the gen- 
eral laws referred to. A law there may be which shall provide 
that even these general laws shall give way in certain circum- 
stances — as for instance, before the prayers of a suffering people, 
who shall have greatly honored themselves and their God, by 
attaining a certain posture of soul. A law is not impossible, 
which, the conditions precedent being supplied, shall compel 
even the sun and moon to stand still, in answer to prayer. I 
confess that it is not for man to limit the Divine possibilities, 
nor to essay to number and comprehend all the laws of the uni- 
verse. 



62 THE RELIGION OF REASOIs. 

Are my suppositions at war with the unchangeableness of the 
general laws? They are not. The provision from eternity, 
that a possible or given conjuncture shall serve to arrest one of 
these laws, is from eternity a part of that law : and the actual 
conjuncture does not change the law. 

We can not guard too carefully against all undue limitation 
of the efi&ciency of prayer, and all undue diminution of the 
motives to engage in it. Let us, who believe that the religion 
of reason calls for the religion of nature, remember that the flow 
of prayer is as natural as the flow of water. The prayerless 
man has become an unnatural man. Jesus " continued all night 
in prayer to God :" and he was the wisest and best of men, be- 
cause the most natural of men — because the truest to his nature. 

I will say nothing here of "special providences," except that 
if they do occur they must be the result of the unchangeable 
and eternal laws of the unchangeable and eternal God. 

A few words more in regard to these general laws. There is 
a view of them which multiplies infidels with a fearful rapidity. 
It is that view which puts them in the place of a personal God, by 
representing Him as having set them in motion, and then turning 
his back upon them. But these laws are not God. They are 
only the modes by which He works, and they have no power 
only as He constantly energizes them, and no existence only as 
He constantly breathes his own into them. 

To return again to the line of argument in this discourse — 
I was speaking of the true religion as a spirit of justice and good- 
ness, and also of its proper service toward God. I now pass on 
to speak of its proper and more important service toward man. 
More important I say, since its truest service toward man is also 
its truest service toward God. More important, too, since only 
a small part of our time should be consumed with direct duties to 
God, and nearly all of it with direct duties to man. Paul says 
that " all the law is fulfilled " in our duties to man. 

Alas ! how wanting in the characteristics of the true religion 
have the prevailing religions of the world always proved them- 
selves to be by their unhappy bearing on human nature ! Con- 
clusive witnesses of this are those deep wrongs done to man ever 
and every where ; that contemptuous disregard of his rights ; 
that heartless indifference to the essential wants and urgent de- 
mands of his hiofh and sacred nature. What overwhelminor tes- 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 63 

timony against these religions have we in Polygamy, Land-mo- 
nopoly, War, Slavery, and the annihilation of the rights of Wo- 
man ! 

. These crimes prevail because conventional and false religions 
prevail: and never shall we find relief from them and a remedy 
for the ruin they have wrought, until we shall find it in a reli- 
gion harmonizing with human nature, and growing out of it — 
a religion, in short, which shall allow human nature to be a law 
unto itself and to be its own religion. That eminently profound 
observer, Madame de Stael, justly accords to the Christian phi- 
losophy the high honor of seeking to harmonize religion with 
human nature, {celk qui clierche Vanahgie de la religion avec la na- 
ture humain.) I add that we can never learn what is the true re- 
ligion except by studying the rights and wants of human nature. 
Hitherto religions altogether alien and revolting to human 
nature have been forced upon it — religions whose slanderous 
song is : 

"Nature must count her gold but dross, 
If she would gain the heavenly land ;" 

religions that have impudently and lyingly asserted their supe- 
riority to human nature, and that have thereby succeeded in 
bringing it under their tyrannical and crushing sway ; religions 
that under the plea of saving human nature, have gone about to 
kill it. Is this idea of having our nature be our law and our re- 
ligion, startling and offensive to you ? Goodness, I am aware, is 
well-nigh universally regarded as an external injunction upon, 
rather than a law of, our nature. But to be truly good and 
truly religious, is not to be in bondage to a foreign authority. 
It is, on the contrary, to enjoy the freedom of living out our own 
good nature and being ourselves. He who made us bids us be 
what He made us — bids us live out ourselves. 

I know that this doctrine of the goodness of human nature 
must shock some of my hearers — for they, and, indeed, nearly all 
of us, were trained up to believe in its total depravity. Would 
that men universally had faith in its goodness! Such faith 
would serve mightily to lift up their lives to the high level of 
their nature. On the other hand, their degrading submission to 
the doctrine of their total depravity goes very far toward ac- 
counting for their false morality, base spirit, and dwarfed man- 
hood. So long as they believe in this doctrine, they will be an 



64 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

easy prey to the priesthood. For so long they will feel them- 
selves to be incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, and 
compelled to go outside of themselves to supply the deficiency. 
This deficiency the priesthood stands ever ready to supply, 
either by means of its interpretation of books, or simply its own 
dicta. Hence men receive this as right, and reject that as 
wrong, not because they see them to be so, but because of their 
being told that they are so. Hence it is explained that many 
worthy people admit that even Slavery is right. Instantly 
would they condemn it were their moral sense allowed to pass 
upon it. But their moral sense, the theologians tell them, is so 
blunted and blinded by their total depravity as to make it 
necessary to supersede it by a revelation — by a book. It is by 
thus denying to men the ability, and therefore the right, to judge 
for themselves, even in the plainest of moral matters ; it is by 
thus overriding them with authority, and reducing them to 
puppets, that they are so largely characterized by a sense of 
irresponsibility, by ignorance, weakness, superstition, cowardice. 
It is, in a word, by this means, that they are brought to live a 
life which is sunk sO far below their nature. 

A natural religion is, as we have already substantially said, 
the only one for which reason calls. Men study books to learn 
religion. But while we readily admit that some books, and 
especially the precious Bible, (that most eloquent defender, next 
to Nature, of both Divine and human rights, as we joyfully see 
it to be when wielded by such a mighty man of God as 
Gheever,) are useful to this end, we must nevertheless insist 
that the study of nature is immeasurably more so. So far as 
the Yedas or Koran may be a record of the teachings of nature, 
or may be in harmony with those teachings, they are valuable : 
and only by the same rule is the value of the Bible to be 
judged. It is by means of books and their own imaginations 
that men conjure up these crazy religions that make such fright- 
ful and ruinous war on human nature — dwarfing and shriveling 
it with the terrors of their horrid hells, and debasing and be- 
fooling it with their superstitious and puerile pictures of hea- 
ven. But only let reason be obeyed, and a natural religion be 
allowed to take the place of these artificial, fanciful, and insane 
religions, and the abuses of human nature will cease, and the 
deep wounds they have made upon it will be quickly healed, 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 65 

its fair proportions be all recovered, and its union with the 
Divine nature be reestablished. 

I spoke of the mistake of studying religion in books rather 
than in nature. I remark, incidentally, that in this mistake is 
to be found the fruitful source of sectarianism. Were the nature- 
religion substituted for the book-religion, there could be no 
sect. Nearly all cultivated men read nature substantially alike, 
and so would all men but for the authority which they allow 
to certain books. Take away from the thousand Christian sects 
their temptation to quarrel about a few words in the Bible, and 
their occupation would be gone, and their de^th would be cer- 
tain. But this temptation will all disappear the moment they 
shall see that nature, and not a book, is authority in religion. 

It is our duty to be reformers. But reformers we shall not 
be unless we make ourselves aware and keep ourselves aware 
of the spuriousness of the popular religion. Frequent are the 
occasions which reveal that spuriousness : and it may be profit- 
able for us all if we bring into review at this time some of 
these revelations. 

The Governments of Massachusetts and New-York were 
recently called on to provide protection for fugitive slaves. 
But they refused. Why did they ? Government in its true 
sense is simply the collective people, charged with the duty of 
protecting each one of the people. The plea for their refusal 
was, that Massachusetts and New- York are under a promise not 
to protect this class of persons. Admit that they are, (though 
every endeavor to show that they are must be in contempt and 
defiance of the canon of legal interpretation,) nevertheless, 
ought not the protection to have been afforded first, and the 
promise to have been considered afterward ? The duty of the 
protection could not be conditional on any thing. At all times, 
and in all circumstances, such a duty is imperative and absolute. 
Ought not Herod to have saved John first, and to have left to 
after consideration his promise involving the contrary ? More- 
over, could it have been the true religion which would have led 
him, in such after consideration, to regret the breaking of a 
promise that called for murder? Certainly not. No more 
could it have been the true religion which would have brought 
the Legislatures in question to repent themselves of having 
broken a promise which called for a greater crime than murder. 
5 



bb THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

I say a greater — for to be guilty, directly or indirectly, of re- 
plunging a brother into the pit of Slavery is worse than to have 
a part in murdering him. We had all rather have our children 
murdered than enslaved. The Legislature or Court that dares 
insult human nature by entertaining the question whether man 
is merchandise is no better than a mob, and has no more rights 
than a mob. Nay, it is a mob; and a right-minded people 
would sustain their Executive in forcibly dispersing it. Were 
the people of Ohio inspired by the true religion, instead of be- 
ing debased by a false one, they would command their Governor 
to put an immediate stop to this trying of men in her Courts 
for not obeying a law for Slavery. There can be no law for 
what is itself not law ; and to know Slavery as law is an olBfense 
against human nature, unsurpassed, as well for its absurdity, as 
for its criminality. 

Let me not be understood as holding that every unwise pro- 
mise should be broken. If I have promised two dollars for a 
service which proves to be worth but one, I had, nevertheless, 
better pay the two dollars. If the people have in the Consti- 
tution promised to do foolish things, let them be done, provided 
the doing of them is insisted on. But whatever may be said in 
regard to things merely foolish, there can be no obligation to do 
what is clearly wicked. Law is for righteousness. For wicked- 
ness there can be no law. 

In this great wickedness of the Legislatures of Massachusetts 
and New- York, the people of these States acquiesce. Doubt- 
less they stand ready to reelect those members who voted 
against the slaves, under the plea of their virtual promi-se to vote 
against them. Doubtless they do themselves feel the force of 
this plea. So far as they do, they prove that the religion of 
the people, as well as of the Legislatures of these States, is no 
better than that of the infamous Herod. Thus abominable is a 
conventional and book-religion. But in what beautiful con- 
trast to it stands the religion of nature ! — that reasonable re- 
ligion which treats all beings according to their natures — the 
man according to his, and the horse according to his ; not the 
man as if he were a horse, any more than the horse as if he 
were a man. Our slaveholding religion subjects a man to the 
discipline of a horse, and thus rivals the absurdity of the me- 
morable attempt in Rome to exalt a horse to the dignity of a 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 67 

man. The religion of nature docs not treat one man as a hog, 
and another as superhuman, but, recognizing the common na- 
ture of all men, be they white, red, or black, it brings them all 
under a common treatment. Hence, the religion of nature can 
have no fellowship with slaveholding, nor with Massachusetts, 
New- York, nor any other State which gives the least counte- 
nance to slaveholding. For slaveholding lifts up the slave- 
holder above all the rights of human nature, and reduces the 
slave to a brute. Nor can it have fellowship with the selling 
of intoxicating drinks, since that fills the coffers of some men 
at the expense of sinking others below the brute. 

What an enemy instead of friend of the natural and only rea- 
sonable religion, must be the religion which is in full fellowship 
with these unnatural and enormous crimes ! . Base indeed must 
be the religion in which there is not virtue enough to shut up 
the dram-shop, and to afford shelter to the pursued slave. Base 
indeed must it have made the people who elect Pro-slavery and 
dram-shop Legislatures. 

We pass on to other illustrations of the spuriousness of the 
prevailing religion. The American Tract Society justifies its 
wickedness, also, on the ground of its promise to be wicked. 
Quite recently it has again, under the plea of its virtual promise 
to withhold this part of the Gospel, excused itself for refusing 
" to preach deliverance" to the slaves. As if a promise, be it 
real or pretended, express or implied, to rob the most persecut- 
ed and peeled class of men of that God's testimony for the faith 
ful promulgation of which they are in perishing need, could 
excuse the robbers [ And these superlatively guilty robbers 
carry on their robbery in the name and with the solemn air and 
long face of piety, and as if it were a plainly commanded and 
indispensable duty and service to Him who has said : " I the 
Lord love judgment: I hate robbery for burnt offering." 

Another recent illustration of the falseness of the current reli- 
gion is afforded in the almost universal sympathy with the mur- 
derer of Philip Barton Key. The secular press fiivored his ac- 
quittal. So did a portion of the religious press ; and, so far as 
I know, no portion of it contended for his conviction. But why 
should he have been acquitted ? Because, say his apologists, 
he was angry when he did the deed. What I the ruin of his 
wife beget in him the superficial and cheap emotion of anger I 



do THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

A base man, indeed, must he then be. A noble man in such 
circumstances would be filled, aj, he might be even killed, with 
grief. But the sorrow of his soul would be too deep, and would 
be too sacred and select, to express itself in the vulgar and 
brutal demonstrations of anger. 

We proceed to the most relied-on and popular excuse for the 
murder. It is that the adulterer deserves to die. But our la,w 
does not say so. The law of Moses does, is the reply ; and a 
great parade of it was made both in and out of the Court. So 
does Moses' law say that *' every one who curseth his father or 
his mother shall be surely put to death." So, too, does it say 
that to gather sticks on the Sabbath is an offense punishable 
with death. And what gross inconsistency and glaring hypoc- 
risy it is to hold up some of his laws as obligatory and to make 
no account of others ! Moses, however, did not mean that per- 
sons should be put to death for these offenses without having 
first had a trial. Moreover, his code was for an ignorant and 
uncivilized people, and it is not for us. Christ is our lawgiver, 
and he confronts Moses the lawgiver. Christ, rather than have 
the adulterer suffer the unreasonable punishment of death, 
would say to him : " Go, and sin no more." 

Will the defenders of this murderer stand by their doctrine 
that, where the law does not provide a penalty private wrath 
should ? Then let them, as consistency and honesty require, 
look upon the slave, not the seduction only of whose wife and 
daughters, but the forcible subjection of them to lust, is among 
everyday actualities as well as possibilities. Let them, I say, 
look on him, and admit his duty to wreak the deep vengeance 
of his soul upon those who have trampled down his holy mari- 
tal and parental rights, as well as all the other rights of his 
manhood. 

Again, are the defenders of this doctrine and this murderer 
prepared to have the wife of the adulterer go forth to shoot the 
adulteress ? They are, if they are honest and consistent. And 
again, would they have the seduced rather than the seducer 
murdered ? Who knows that Key was not the seduced party ? 
Whatever justice at this point he might have been able to do 
his reputation, he was not permitted to do. For he was first 
murdered and then tried. 

Once more : Are these defenders willing that all persons who 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. b\) 

suspect, or, if you please, believe, that their conjugal partner is 
unfaithful, shall act, pistol in hand, upon the first impulses of 
their suspicions, or even upon their fully-matured beliefs? For 
surely, if this action shall be allowed to any, it must be to all. 
B'ut in ten thousand cases the mind in which such suspicions 
spring up or such beliefs are matured, would be so swayed by 
Ignorance, prejudice, and passion, as to be utterly incapable ot 
weighing evidence. What, however, if it shall be even a very 
wise and good man who shall suspect me of a crime ? — still, and 
even if it be a crime ever so worthy of death, I must insist on 
the right of being tried before I am killed. 

In this new order of things, whose life is safe? Not mine; 
not yours. Every where there are jealous persons silly or stupid 
enough to be persuaded, though without any reason, of attempts 
to debauch their wives, or daughters, or sisters. Hence, if this 
tendency in our country to let the jealous man be judge, jury 
and executioner in his own case, shall gain as much strength in 
a few years to come as it has in the last few years, there will 
not be another country on earth where murder will be so fre- 
quent, and the life of an innocent person so insecure. If juries 
will help arrest the rapid progress of our nation to the lowest 
barbarism, they must promptly convict the class of murderers 
to which the murderer of Philip Barton Key belongs. As 
things are going, they had better let any other class of murder- 
ers escape. 

But would I not look to the husband to protect the wife from 
sedection? Ko — I would look to herself Her own virtues 
are her only legitimate earthly protectors from such a fate. All 
the aid I would require of a husband would be to live such a 
life before her as should minister strength to those virtues 
How degrading to woman is this doctrine that blood must be 
shed in order to deter men from using her upon their lusts I 
To what a low place in the scale of intelligent beings does it 
consign her ! 

But would I not have civil government prescribe a penalty 
for sexual intercourse out of wedlock ? Certainly I would. Its 
office, ay, its sole ofiice, is to protect the great natural rights of 
man : and these are never more flagrantly invaded than by such 
intercourse. Let me here say that in no land is there civil gov- 
ernment. Emphatically true is this in respect to our own land. 



70 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

Its place here is usurped bj a bold and infamous conspiracy 
against human rights. God made every man to own himself. 
But this conspiracy which we call Government, allows one man 
to own another. Again, our Government, like Governments 
in other lands, instead of protecting life and property, licenses 
the dram-shop — that immeasurably greatest manufactory of mad- 
men, murderers, and incendiaries. These are illustrative of the 
spuriousness of the religion which permits them. Another is to 
be found in land-monopoly. Government, here and elsewhere, 
allows one man to grasp fifty homes, and to leave thereby forty- 
nine men homeless. For^ beside that we each need but one 
home, there is but one home for each of us. The defeat of the 
Grow-amended Land Bill in the last Congress shows that the 
protection of human rights, which is the great object of the true 
religion, is no object at all of the popular religion. 

Now, it is on the very same principle on which Government 
shouM forbid land-monopoly that it should also forbid sexual 
intercourse out of wedlock. In other words, it should harmo- 
nize with nature and the religion of nature, and ordain that 
every man shall have but one wife, and every woman but one 
husband. But one, I repeat: for the census tables of all coun- 
tries show that the sexes are substantially equal in numbers. 
And with this great fact in nature the teaching of Jesus agrees, 
when he says, " God made them male and female ;" not ten 
women for one man, nor ten men for one woman ; but one for 
one. On this simple ground, that nature affords but one of one 
sex to one of the other, should Government punish polygamy ; 
that is, on the simple ground that for Government to allow a 
man to get two wives, or a woman to get two husbands, would 
be to allow them to rob their fellows of a great natural right — 
the right to a wife in the one case, and to a husband in the 
other. Herein, and herein only, do we see how to reach the 
solution of that great problem in Utah which so perplexes our 
statesmen — our poor statesmen who are as ignorant that all 
questions in the province of politics are to be solved solely in 
the light of the rights and wants of human nature, as are our 
poor theologians, that all questions in the province of religion, 
also, are to be solved solely in that same light. 

But it may be said that my argument is against polygamy 
only — only against a plurality of husbands and wives. I an- 



TJIE l^ELIGION OF REASON. 71 

swer that it is equally applicable to the condemnation of the 
licentiousness which is not practised under the name and shel- 
ter of matrimony as to that which is. Government is bound to 
punish the one as well as the other, for precisely the same rea- 
son and with precisely the same severity — the robbery of great 
natural rights being precisely the same in the one case as in tlie 
other. That it is precisely the same is obvious, from the fact 
that the man whose commerce is not confined to his wife, but 
is with other women also, robs her of a husband, inasmuch as 
his licentiousness disqualifies him to be a husband ; and robs 
men of wives by disqualifying those other women to be wives. 
A similar robbery does the licentious woman practise upon her 
husband and upon her own sex. 

Not very remotely connected with the questions we have just 
been disscussing is that of divorce. This, like the others, is 
very readily solved in the clear and strong light of authoritative 
nature. But how puzzling is the problem if we grope for its 
solution among the uncertain and conflicting interpretations of 
books ! The way that this question is disposed of politically, 
and for the most part ecclesiastically, is but little in harmony 
with the teachings of nature, and is a further illustration of the 
worthlessness of artificial religions, and of the necessity of return- 
ing to the religion of nature and reason. 

Why should people marry ? Because " it is not good that the 
man should be alone." Because the human heart yearns for the 
freest communion and fullest sympathy with some other heart. 
Because no one is capable of going alone and uncounselled 
through the trials and perplexities before him ; and with no 
bosom friend to soothe and cheer and sustain him amid the sor- 
rows and sufferings that await him. It is for such reasons, and 
because joy is thereby doubled as well as pain divided, that the 
journey of life should be travelled in pairs — each pair being 
bound together in that mutual love which never wearies of its 
ministerings, and never forsakes its chosen companion. 

Much has been said and written in our day in fiivor of mak- 
ing a physically healthy offspring the paramount object in 
choosing a husband or wife. But, in point of fact, it is very 
rarely made such ; very rarely made any object whatever ; and, 
in my judgment, should never be. I would that persons should 
marry each other simply because they have fallen so deeply in 



72 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

love as to feel that they must — ay, already do belong to each 
Other ; and are irrevocably chosen to care for and bless each 
other ; and can never, while life lasts, be separated from each 
other. Children are to be regarded not as the direct object, but 
as one of the natural and unstudied incidents of marriage. I 
admit that when parents find themselves bringing diseased and 
miserable children into the world they had better lock up their 
faculties than multiply such children. Let me here say that it 
is not only probable that the child of parents, whose marriage 
sprang from their true love of each other and a deep soul-union 
with each other, is far more likely to be morally sound than the 
child of parents who are brought together with about the same 
calculation for the improvement of human stock as enters into 
the improvement of breeds of animals ; but that it is also prob- 
able that he who was born with a poor physical constitution 
will be like to improve it if he have a good moral one ; while 
he who has a poor moral one will probably be reckless of his 
physical constitution. Thus has a love-marriage the promise ot 
children healthier, not only in soul, but in the end in body also. 
Far away, then, from marriage be all calculation. The blindest 
and most improvident love-match is infinitely preferable to a 
calculated and calculating match. A marriage, if need be, in 
the face of all calculation because so brimful of love — a down- 
right can't-help-it marriage — ^is the true one. 

In what cases would I have divorce allowed ? I say, with the 
Catholic Church, in none. But would I not when there is 
adultery ? No, not even then. In any case whatever, it vio- 
lates great human rights. Nature, as we have seen from the 
census tables, does not allow it ; and Jesus, far greatest of all the 
moral interpreters of Nature, does not. It is true that there is one 
offense for which he allows the husband to put away the wife • 
but he declares him to be guilty of adultery if he marries again. 
Though we are not bound to cohabit with an adulterous person, 
nevertheless, not even adultery breaks the tie of marriage. 
My wife is incapable of becoming the wife of another so long as 
I live. My crime may be such as to make it incompatible with 
her self-respect and her other duties to continue to live with me- 
But she is never to cease from her efforts for my reformation, 
and she is never to put herself in such circumstances as would 
disable her from receiving me, should I return to her in peni- 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 73 

tence. This, however, she clearly would do by marrying an- 
other. I know not the genius nor requirements of Christianity 
if it would have the wife forgive her husband when he repents 
of his lying or theft, and it would not also have her take him 
back to her arms when he has repented of his adultery. 

I said that my wife ought not to marry another while I am 
alive ; and I have already argued in effect to this conclusion. 
T have already virtually shown that for her to do so would be 
not only to wrong me but to practise a robbery upon her sex, 
some of whom must go unmarried if others have more than one 
living husband. 

. I said that in no case should there be divorce. Let it be un- 
derstood that there can not be, and the caution in selecting a 
conjugal partner would be greatly increased. Moreover, there 
would be a fresh motive then for the seasonable healing of those 
dissensions in married life which are so often allowed to run on 
and result in mutual estrangement and divorce. But so long 
as the marriage knot can be untied — even though it can be by 
adultery only — so long will there be endeavors to untie it. 
The wicked wife may, for the sake of getting it untied, practise 
her arts to involve her husband in adultery, and the wicked 
husband may seek this end by similar means. 

I say no more of marriage, only that if it is to be invested 
with far more of beauty, dignity, and solemnity, and to be made 
far more productive of blessedness, it must be held to be as en- 
during as life itself. 

Thus have I set before you as far as I well could within the 
narrow limits of a single discourse the religion of nature. If 
the one great direct object of true religion is the protection of 
natural rights, then we must have a natural religion to accom- 
plish it. Natural rights never have been, and never will be, 
protected under artificial religions ; and the fact that they are 
cloven down the earth over, is conclusive evidence that arti- 
ficial religions prevail the earth over. Friend of Temperance, 
friend of Peace, friend of Freedom ! work on against Intoxicat- 
ing Drinks, and War, and Slavery ; but flatter yourselves with 
no hope of permanent or extensive success — until the current 
religion has been supplanted by the religion of nature. Seeker 
of reform in politics I the current religion blocks up your way 
also. Corrupt and crazy as are our politics, they are neverthe- 



74 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

less no worse than our religion. Nay, they are always one with 
it. The State is never more rotten than the Church. 

We frequently hear the light of nature spoken of as dim and 
doubtful and deceiving. But, in point of fact, is it not the only 
clear and bright and sure one ? Jesus himself is not another 
light. He is the perfect medium through which the light of 
nature shines. The common opinion is that nature is not a 
sufficient source whence to make up our religion. A much- 
relied-on proof that it is not, is its failure to teach the doctrine 
of the resurrection of the body. I admit that it does not teach 
it. I admit that it teaches the reverse. But this doctrine, 
which is of so much interest to the superstitious and specula- 
tive, natural religion has nothing at all to do with. Its only 
concern is to make better the moral character of men ; and 
whether this doctrine is true or false does in no wise affect such 
character. But, saying nothing of his body, does nature teach 
that man shall live again? Unless she does, how slow should 
^ve be to believe it ? A doctrine so important as another life is 
not to be confidently received on any less certain testimony 
than nature herself. Unless it is at least countenanced by na- 
ture, it should not be received at all. 

I believe there are strong, I will not say conclusive, proofs in 
nature that man shall live again. One is, that God made him 
in His own likeness. That He did so, we endeavored to show 
in an early part of this discourse. He put into him His own 
spirit, and made him to be His immortal companion and co- 
worker. Another of these proofs is, that God made him with 
^v^ants that this life can not . satisfy. The horse and dog, and 
other creatures, whose knowledge is mainly instinctive, attain 
here their summit of knowledge, and therefore of enjoyment 
and usefulness also. But man gathers up all earthly knowledge 
only to long for more. The more he learns, the more unsatis- 
fied is he with the measure of his learning ; and by the very 
laws of his being, as they stand revealed to him in his own his- 
tory and experience, he seems compelled to regard his present 
degrees of knowledge, and consequently of usefulness and hap- 
piness also, as but earnests of their infinite growth hereafter. 
The more ISTewton and Humboldt learned, the more they became 
little children; not only in the growing simplicity of their spirit, 
but in the conscious poverty of their knowledge. With the 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 75 

growth of their knowledge grew their sense of their ignorance ; 
and when they came to die, the rich and deep diapason, made 
up of all the voices of their being and all the voices of their 
experience, sounded ont the sweet and full assurance tliat they 
were but in the infancy of their existence, and that their death 
was to be not their death, but a new and nobler life. 

I have but time to add, under this head, that if the spiritual- 
ists are not deceived, they have discovered another and a con- 
clusive natural evidence that man is to live again. It may be 
many years, however, before the phenomena of spiritualism will 
be sufiiciently accumulated and authenticated to establish in all 
minds the fact that Nature teaches another state of human ex- 
istence. 

Kepeatedly, in this discourse, have I called the religion I am 
commending the religion of nature. With entire propriety I 
might always have called it the religion of reason, since it is 
reason that discerns and approves and adopts it. 

I notice that my use of the word reason in former discourses 
on the religion of reason is criticised. My critics appear to 
confine the meaning of the word to ratiocination, or the process 
of reasoning. But does it not also mean the result arrived at 
through such process? The conclusion that the slave should 
be set free results from sound reasoning : in other words, is sup- 
ported by reason, and therefore may be and is called reason. 
So, too, the conclusion that men should not poison and defile 
themselves with intoxicating liquors and tobacco is another 
result of sound reasoning, and comes properly under the name 
of reason. The right — the right as it is seen in the light of 
reason — is surely one of the admitted definitions of reason ; and 
therefore have I felt justified to speak of reason as the standard 
with which to compare the claims of a religion. Does a religion 
attribute to God an arbitrary and cruel disposition ? — then do 1 
condemn it, because it wars at that essential point with reason. 
Does it, on the other hand, accord to Him a paternal and loving 
spirit? — so far, then, do I welcome it, because so fiir it abides 
the test of reason. 

My efforts the last few years in behalf of the religion of rea- 
son, have been construed by many into attacks upon Christian- 
ity. Nevertheless, they were intended as an humble means 
toward saving it. Love to God and love to man are the esseii- 



76 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

tial elements of Christianity ; and as nothing can be more rea- 
sonable than these, it is impossible that reason should make war 
upon Christianity. More than this : the religion of reason and 
the Christian religion are necessarily one. I admit that the 
religion of reason is a different thing from the spurious Christ- 
ianity which prevails in every part of Christendom. I admit 
that all its artillery is directed against that wicked and ruinous 
counterfeit. But the true Christianity — the Christianity of the 
Bible — the Christianity taught by the lips and life of Jesus — 
has no truer friend than reason. Indeed, it is alone by the 
force of reason, guided and blest of heaven, that a false Christ- 
ianity can be beaten back from its usurpations, and the true 
reenthroned. 

The religion of reason is indispensable, not only for the pur- 
pose of putting t© flight a counterfeit, but also for the purpose 
of preserving the genuine Christianity, and gaining a hold for 
it on the public heart. It is indispensable not only to show 
how worthless is the Christianity which is in fellowship with 
slavery and the dram-shop and other abominations, but also to 
persuade men of the truth and preciousness of that Christianity 
which allies itself to no wrong, and sustains every right. To 
persuade them I mean, by proofs addressed to their understand- 
ing, and not by appeals to their superstitious credulity. 

Because of their own deep sense of its excellence, Christians 
have been wont to challenge an unquestioning and unhesitating 
faith in their religion. They have promptly sentenced to end- 
less woe all who dare to doubt the truth of any position of the 
Bible, or to call in question any of the principal ecclesiastical 
interpretations of it. True, many of them have acknowledged 
in words the right to investigate the popular views of Christian- 
ity : but with very few exceptions, they have all abjured it in 
practice. Even those who tolerate this investigation, do so with 
the understanding and advertisement that whoever shall dare 
come to a conclusion opposite their own, will, for a daring so 
wicked, merit everlasting punishment. But the growing intel- 
ligence of mankind will not much longer consent to repose a 
blind faith in the best religion. It will soon insist that even 
such a religion must be more than alleged — must be proved — 
to be true, before men will be bound to believe in it. In the 
ages of superstition, and in the subsequent ages of speculation, 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 77 

through which nations pass, a religion does not need to bo 
backed with logic in order to gain currency even with the intel- 
ligent. But Christendom has now become so philosophical and 
practical that nothing except religion can longer pass in it with- 
out proof; and before many years more shall have elapsed there 
will be no longer even this exception. 

By the way, this assuming the truth of Christianity as the 
churches and their members do, is not, as they suppose it to be, 
honoring Christianity. It is dishonoring it. Truth is honored 
not by a blind assent to her claims, but by that acquiescence in 
them which she wins from those who faithfully investigate them. 
The Bible is insulted by being assumed to be true, but honored 
by those who think its claims upon their faith worthy to be 
investigated. 

Our claim of superiority for this age will be admitted only 
with qualifications. Our superiority in general science will be 
admitted, but not in the science of religion. Is not, however, 
the delusion as great as it is common, that the one gets ahead of 
the other? As a general proposition the one always keeps 
pace with the other. Do you say that France, while on the one 
hand making rapid progress in general science, has on the other 
become infidel ? I admit it, especially in respect to the intel- 
lectual portion of her people. But I claim that her infidelity 
proves her great progress toward the true religion ; for it proves 
that she is passing out of the superstitious and speculative ages 
that every nation will yet pass out of, and that she can no longer 
be satisfied with religions that claim faith without making good 
their claim. Her call now is for a religion which can be proved 
to be true ; and, unhappily, her belief to a very great extent is 
that Christianity can not be proved to be true. Such, also, is 
the call, and to such an extent the unhappy belief of Italy and 
of some of the German States. Such, too, of vast numbers in 
England and America, who, in common with vast numbers in 
other lands, have either become, or always were infidels. But 
while we rejoice in their escape from the superstitious and vis- 
ionary, we are nevertheless not blind to their mistake — their 
great and lamentable mistake — that Christianity can not be 
proved to be true. What if the churches and priesthood do 
assume the truth of it, and do virtually forbid the bringing 
forth of its legitimate and conclusive proofs ? Nevertheless the 



78 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

proofs exist, and the religion of reason will take them up and 
use them to the scattering of all skepticism, and to the sure and 
successful planting of the blessed faith in the waste places and 
fallow grounds of infidelity. The religion of reason will prove 
that nature teaches love to God and love to man, justice and 
mercy, and all the elements of Christianity, and that, therefore, 
Christianity is true. Or, to use another form of statement, the 
religion of reason will show that Christianity is true by showing 
that Jesus was, as we have already said, the true moral inter- 
preter of nature. 

Such will be the service that the religion of reason will ren- 
der to Christianity. Of boundless importance, how^ever, as this 
service will be, it will nevertheless be but an incidental one. 
The direct object — ^the sole aim — of the religion of reason is : 
First, to convince every man that his reason is to be allowed 
(for his reason alone is authorized) to decide what shall be his 
conduct and character ; and, second, to keep him by means of 
his own strength and of all the aids of heaven and earth in a 
state of unswerving fidelity to this high conviction and all its 
just requirements. God speaks in His creation and providence. 
Jesus speaks as " never man spake." His ministry will never 
cease to pour forth a flood of light. The great and good men 
and women of every age contribute their measures of enlighten- 
ment. But these are all voices for the ear of reason ; and not 
one of them — no, not even that of the Great God — has a right 
to be heard in the sanctuary of the soul except through the 
influence of such voice upon the reason. I have been wont to 
say that the reason of man is the voice of God w^ithin him. If 
this is not literally true, nevertheless that God's voice reaches 
him through his reason is literally true. Save that which lies 
through our reason- wrought convictions, there is not for the 
Church, nor for the Priesthood, nor for the Bible, any road to 
those sacred chambers w^here the mind, under its sole responsi- 
bility, because sole master of itself, forms its judgments and 
comes to its decisions. It is God himself who has ordained this 
supremacy of reason ; and not to acknowledge this supremac}^, 
constantly and practically and gratefully, is to be guilty of 
rebelling against His government. It is God himself who has 
made the bringing of all our appetites, passions and pursuits 
into quick and glad subjection to our reason, the great law of 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 79 

our nature ; and therefore not to obey this law is to prove our- 
selves traitors to our own nature. 

Yet awhile, the religion of reason will continue to be derided 
and hated. But it will be neither discouraged nor impatient. 
It will be of good cheer and bide its time. Yet awhile, super- 
stition, bigotry, and prejudice will continue to darken men's 
minds, and corrupt their hearts, and indispose them to the reign 
of reason. But the fallacy and failure of every religion which 
does not make its appeal to reason, become every day more and 
more manifest ; and thus every day is the way becoming clearer 
and easier for the progress of the religion of reason. It may 
not soon prevail, but it surely will prevail. Linger however it 
may, the day will yet dawn when men the earth over will 
believe that they must let their reason rule them in all things, 
especially in religion. It will yet be acknowledged that the 
most reason-ruled man is the most religious man — that to be 
reasonable is the highest possible attainment : nay, that reason 
— clear, sound, right reason — is itself religion — the highest and 
truest religion. But dawn that day when it may, not till then 
will man become what his Maker made him to be, for not till 
then will he realize and verify his own grand nature. Not till 
he shall study to mould himself after the standards and ideals 
of reason will his life and character be such as to prove to the 
universe that God made him but " little lower than the angels, 
and crowned him with glory and honor." 

Do you ask how we shall attain to an understanding of the 
duties of the religion of reason ? I answer by living reasonably. 
Jesus teaches that the doctrines of God are to be learned by 
doing the will of God. A similar rule applies in the present 
similar case. We must not act unreasonably, as do the secta- 
rians — for they organize parties with the intent of excluding 
from them the friends of Christ. As if the friends of Christ 
could be excluded without his being excluded also ! We must 
not act unreasonably, as do the temperance societies, which will 
one day denounce the selling of intoxicating drinks as the black- 
est crime, and will the next use their machinery and members 
to elect men whose official powers are employed to whitewash 
this blackest crime and screen it from punishment. Nor must 
we act unreasonably, as do the Abolitionists, who, though 
declaring Slavery to be the superlative piracy, do nevertheless 



80 THH RELIGION OF REASON. 

elect men who honor it as law, and thereby give to it their offi- 
cial and sustaining sanction. He is in effect a Pro-Slaverj man 
and not an Abolitionist, who does not hold slavery to be an 
outlaw, and does not confine his votes to such candidates as hold 
likewise. Nor must we act unreasonably, as do those clergy- 
men who on one occcasion pour out unmeasured execrations 
upon slavery, and upon another virtually recall and sadly neu- 
tralize them by fellowshipping as Christians, and by honoring with 
their love and commending with their confidence, clergymen 
who are the most notorious and wicked defenders of slavery. 
Nor must we act unreasonably, as does that large class of pro- 
fessing Christians who, though recognizing themselves to be 
'' the temple of God," and often praying to be cleansed " from 
all filthiness of the flesh and spirit," are, notwithstanding, guilty 
of defiling body and soul with rum, tobacco, or opium. 

In all respects and all relations we must act reasonably, if we 
would see most clearly and learn most fully what the one true 
religion — the religion of nature or reason — calls for. Such rea- 
sonable acting will of itself reveal the duties that He all along 
our path, and make that path " as the shining light that shineth 
more and more unto the perfect day." 

But is reason sufficient for all these things ? It is. Not, 
however, unless the Divine influence upon it be unceasing. 
Man, as much as the planet, needs to be set in motion, and kept 
in motion by Grod. Yain is an enlightened reason, unless there 
be also the God-given spirit of submission to its control. Vain 
is it that man is made with ability to will and to do, unless he 
allow his Maker to w^ork in him to will and to do. Yain all 
his physical, mental, moral powers if he let not Heaven dispose 
him to put them to a heavenly use. Yain, in a word, is the 
earthly existence of man unless he shall be born again. But, 
blessed be God, all the heaven- wrought changes of spirit, pur- 
pose, life, which are denoted by the figure of the new birth, and 
which every man must experience in order to be saved, lie 
within the reach of every man. If any are left unholy, it is 
because they refuse to be made holy. If any are cut off from 
the overflowing fountain of impartial love and free salvation, it 
is because they cut themselves off from it 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 81 



LETTER TO MR. GOODELL. 



Peterboro, August, 13, 1859. 
Eev. Wm. Goodell, 

My Old and Dear Friend : I have read your letter in the 
New -York Tribune of 9th inst. ; and I beg you to believe that 
it is from no want of respect for you that I refrain from attempt- 
ing a reply to its arguments. - You know that I honor and love 
you greatly. 

Whether it be owing to the lack of lucidness in my Dis- 
course, or to your being excited and discomposed when reading 
it, so it is that you have mistaken its positions, misconceived its 
tenor, and drawn a picture of it which bears no resemblance to 
the original. This being so, it devolves on me no more than 
on any other person, to reply to your arguments. That you 
have thus misapprehended and misrepresented the Discourse, 
will be obvious even to yourself, when you shall have again 
read, and with more care and composure, those portions of it to 
which I will now proceed to refer you. 

1st. You understand me to ignore the offices of conscience 
and faith in religion, and to hold that reason is the only faculty 
to be employed in it. Bat the doctrine of my Discourse is, that 
in religion as well as in other things, reason should guide our 
faculties. To gaide them is surely not all one with excluding 
them. I am not to be charged with denying the necessity of 
faith, when I affirm that all religious faith which is not based 
on reason, is but superstition and delusion. I would say here, 
that I am amazed that William Goodell can argue from the con- 
fiding look of the infant, or from any thing else, or that he 
can in the least degree believe, that faith in God can precede the 
exercise of reason. I did not suppose that such a dream could 
impose on such an intellect. I feel now more than ever how 
urgent is the necessity of preaching the Religion of Reason. 

2d. You understand me to say that the sun, stars, and earth 
are the only sources of religious knowledge. But do I not add 
6 



82 THE RELIGION OF REASON. 

to these man, and providence, and inspiration, and divine in- 
fluence ? Is not the last paragraph of my Discourse a declara- 
tion, that even an enlightened reason is vain without divine in- 
fluence ? It is true that one class of evidence is more certain 
than another; and that the less certain is to be rejected wher- 
ever it comes in conflict with the more certain. But it is also 
true, that there is much evidence which, though not reaching 
to absolute certainty, is nevertheless legitimate and important. 

8d. You believe that I hope for light from the spiritualists. 
But my Discourse does not say that I do or do not entertain such 
a hope. 

4th. I shall be sorry to have your readers believe that I am 
uncertain of a future existence. I wonder that you can believe 
that, notwithstanding my earnest argument for such an exist- 
ence, I am still uncertain of it. No, my brother, I have no 
doubts of another life. I do not believe that the noble thoughts 
which William Goodell has uttered, will live, and he not be 
permitted to live along with them ; that the ages are to enjoy 
them, and he to be shut out from enjoying them ; that his own 
blessed work is to be carried on, and he never permitted to take 
part in it. 

5 th. I did not say, as you intimate I did, that the orthodox 
creed was opposed to the conviction of the murderer of Key. 
Kor do I now say, that, according to this creed, Mr. and Mrs. 
Sickles should not be forgiven, if penitent. But I do say 
that the heartless and Christ-denying current religion, which 
carries along both orthodox and heterodox, holds out no en- 
couragement to their repentance. What an appeal to the heart 
of Christ must be the spectacle of these poor desolate and 
despised ones, undertaking, amidst all the ridicule and scorn of 
a malignant world and no less malignant church, to re-collect 
and build anew, by penitence and forgiveness, their over- 
whelmed and scattered family ! Such an appeal must it also be 
to every heart that is imbued by the spirit and won by the ex- 
ample of Christ. 

6th. I infer from your comparison of orthodoxy with the 
theological systems opposed to it, that you confound and class 
me with Unitarians or Universalists. But for aught I see, Uni- 
tarians and Universalists are no better than the orthodox, and 
are no less chargeable with trampling on human rights, and 



THE RELIGION OF REASON". 83 

turning their backs on the religion of Christ. Unitarians and 
Universalists are as ready as the orthodox to vote pro-slavery 
and rum tickets. Some very sound doctrines there may be 
in their creeds ; nevertheless, what, as a whole, is a man's 
religion worth, which is not able to hold him back from 
voting for men who believe that there can be valid, ob- 
ligatory, sacred, real law for making slaves, and from voting 
for men who believe in the right of making drunkards ? For 
many, many years have I been calling on the Unitarians and 
Universalists, as well as on the orthodox, to throw away these 
religions, which murder instead of saving humanity, and which 
are a stench instead of an incense in the nostrils of heaven. 
For many, many years have I been calling on them to accept, 
in exchange for their abominable religions, the simple religion 
of reason and justice and Jesus. What the world is perishing 
for, is a religion of common sense and common honesty. 

7th. You ask me if " the theology of the New Testament is 
proved to be corrupting ?" What is this theology ? It is just- 
ice, love, mercy; it is doing unto others as we would have 
others do unto us ; it is in one word, reason. If we would re- 
deem theology from the contempt into which it has fallen, we 
must make comparatively no account of every thing in its pop- 
ular signification, which does not stand in essential connection 
with morality and goodness. Comparatively no account must 
we make of the question, whether Christ and his disciples were 
mistaken in regard to any future events. Comparatively no ac- 
count of the nature and duration of future punishment and 
future enjoyment. Act well your part here, and trust your 
Heavenly Father for your future, is the theology of the New 
Testament. I grant that there are many things in this book of 
books which are important and precious helps to our progress 
in theology. But it is the confounding of these helps with this 
theology ; of the scaffolding with the building ; of the husk 
with the grain ; of the circumstantial and speculative with the 
absolute and essential, that so stumbles the world, and holds it 
in the bondage of superstition, and ignorance, and sin. 

No, no, my old friend, I do not believe that the theology of 
the New Testament is corrupting. It " is very pure, therefore 
thy servant loveth it." It commends itself to my reason. My 
nature calls for it. It grows out of my nature and the Divine 



84 THE RELIGION OF REASON". 

nature. I love Jesus, too, as well as this theology ; I love him 
because he taught it in his life, and more impressively in his 
death. No man can look steadily, honestly, comprehensively 
upon that death, and remain destitute of the blessed experience 
that " the blood of Jesus cleanseth from all sin." Upon that 
death, and upon the life which it crowned, men can not fix 
broad and believing looks without growing in likeness to 
Christ. Such looks upon his matchless illustration of the vir- 
tues must result in their making these virtues their own. And 
this is their salvation ; the very salvation taught by Jesus in 
his use of the legend of the b^zen serpent. It comes not of a 
magical nor in anywise mysterious operation ; but from study- 
ing and copying his death-honored life. 

8th. You ask how I " know that miracles and plenary in- 
spiration are violations of general laws." I do not know it. 
My Discourse does not claim that I do. On the contrary, it ad- 
mits that, however improbable may be a miracle, it is possible, 
and this, too, even to the standing still of the sun and moon. As 
to plenary inspiration, I have not pronounced it to be either an 
impossibility or an improbability. All I insist on at this point 
is, that whenever a claim of inspiration, plenary or partial, is 
put forth for any man's words or writings, either inside or out- 
side of the Bible, every one shall be allowed to judge for him- 
self of its merits. It may be an unreasonable claim, even though 
made in behalf of some portion of the Bible — of that book, the 
time of the first compilation of which history has not preserved, 
nor the character of the compilers, nor even their names. On 
the other hand, it may be a reasonable one, even though made 
in behalf of words or writings elsewhere than in the Bible. 

9th. You tell me that I " have only expressed horror and in- 
dignation at the doctrine of eternal punishment ;" and you vir- 
tually advise me to attempt an argument against it. Inasmuch 
as I did this at so great length in my Discourse, I must appre- 
hend that you have not read the whole of it. 

10th. You refer to my position, that even Christ did not 
know all the future. But as you make no reply to my extend- 
ed argument in favor of this position, nor do not so much 
as notice it, am I to conclude that you failed to read this 
argument ? It would be vanity in me to suppose that you read 
it, and found it easier to ignore than answer it. 



THE RELIGION OF REASON. 85 

I proceed no fartlier with this exposure of your misappre- 
hensions and misrepresentations of my Discourse. Enough, 
and more than enough, has been said, to convince you that it 
is not my Discourse that you have reviewed. There are hours 
in the life of ahnost every man when fancy has more power 
over him than fact. It was probably in one of these dreamy 
hours that my Discourse fell under your eye ; and hence we 
have your review of what is not, instead of your review of 
what is. 

But, my dear friend, I know your power and my weakness 
too well to exult in my present escape. You may yet lay hold 
of the Discourse itself; and when you do, your criticisms will 
be nothing to make light of. Moreover, they will be quite 
like to be sharp and relentless as well as weighty, your spirit 
being still vexed, if not revengeful, under the recollection of 
your having hastily substituted for the Discourse the mere 
coinage of your imagination. 

With great regard, 

Your friend, 

Gerrit Smith. 



